UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
   
þ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2008For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2009
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 Registrant, State of Incorporation, I.R.S. Employer
File Number Address and Telephone Number Identification No.
1-3526 
The Southern Company
 58-0690070
  (A Delaware Corporation)  
  30 Ivan Allen Jr. Boulevard, N.W.  
  Atlanta, Georgia 30308  
  (404) 506-5000  
     
1-3164 
Alabama Power Company
 63-0004250
  (An Alabama Corporation)  
  600 North 18th Street  
  Birmingham, Alabama 35291  
  (205) 257-1000  
     
1-6468 
Georgia Power Company
 58-0257110
  (A Georgia Corporation)  
  241 Ralph McGill Boulevard, N.E.  
  Atlanta, Georgia 30308  
  (404) 506-6526  
     
0-2429 
Gulf Power Company
 59-0276810
  (A Florida Corporation)  
  One Energy Place  
  Pensacola, Florida 32520  
  (850) 444-6111  
     
001-11229 
Mississippi Power Company
 64-0205820
  (A Mississippi Corporation)  
  2992 West Beach  
  Gulfport, Mississippi 39501  
  (228) 864-1211  
     
333-98553 
Southern Power Company
 58-2598670
  (A Delaware Corporation)  
  30 Ivan Allen Jr. Boulevard, N.W.  
  Atlanta, Georgia 30308  
  (404) 506-5000  
 
 

 


Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:1
Each of the following classes or series of securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act is listed on the New York Stock Exchange.
     
Title of each class
   Registrant
Common Stock, $5 par value
  The Southern Company
 
Class A preferred, cumulative, $25 stated capital
 Alabama Power Company
5.20% Series5.83% Series 
5.30% Series   
 
Senior Notes
   
5 5/8% Series AA5.875% Series II 
5 7/8% Series GG6.375% Series JJ 
5.875% Series 2007B   
 
Class A Preferred Stock, non-cumulative,
 Georgia Power Company
Par value $25 per share
   
6 1/8% Series   
 
Senior Notes
   
5.90% Series O6% Series R5.70% Series X
5.75% Series T6% Series W5.75% Series G2
6.375% Series 2007D8.20% Series 2008C 
 
Long-term debt payable to affiliated trusts,
$25 liquidation amount
5 7/8% Trust Preferred Securities3
   
5 7/8% Trust Preferred Securities3
Senior Notes
  Gulf Power Company
5.25% Series H5.75% Series I 
5.875% Series J   
 
 
1 As of December 31, 2008.2009.
 
2 Assumed by Georgia Power Company in connection with its merger with Savannah Electric and Power Company, effective July 1, 2006.
 
3 Issued by Georgia Power Capital Trust VII and guaranteed by Georgia Power Company.

 


     
Senior Notes
   Mississippi Power Company
5 5/8% Series E    
 
Depositary preferred shares, each representing one-fourth
of a share of preferred stock, cumulative, $100 par value
  
5.25% Series    
 
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:4
       
Title of each class
     Registrant
Preferred stock, cumulative, $100 par value   Alabama Power Company
4.20% Series 4.60% Series 4.72% Series  
4.52% Series 4.64% Series 4.92% Series  
 
Preferred stock, cumulative, $100 par value   Mississippi Power Company
4.40% Series 4.60% Series    
4.72% Series      
 
 
 
4 As of December 31, 2008.2009.

 


Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
     
Registrant Yes No
The Southern Company ü  
Alabama Power Company ü  
Georgia Power Company ü  
Gulf Power Company   ü
Mississippi Power Company   ü
Southern Power Company   ü
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yeso Noþ (Response applicable to all registrants.)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrants (1) have 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 registrants were required to file such reports), and (2) have been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yesþ Noo
Indicate by check mark whether the registrants have submitted electronically and posted on their corporate web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrants were required to submit and post such files). Yesþ Noo (Response applicable only to The Southern Company at this time.)
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrants’ knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
         
  Large     Smaller
  Accelerated Accelerated Non-accelerated Reporting
Registrant Filer Filer Filer Company
The Southern Company ü      
Alabama Power Company     ü  
Georgia Power Company     ü  
Gulf Power Company     ü  
Mississippi Power Company     ü  
Southern Power Company     ü  
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yeso Noþ (Response applicable to all registrants.)

 


Aggregate market value of The Southern Company’s common stock held by non-affiliates of The Southern Company at June 30, 2008: $26.92009: $24.8 billion. All of the common stock of the other registrants is held by The Southern Company. A description of each registrant’s common stock follows:
       
  Description of Shares Outstanding
Registrant Common Stock at January 31, 20092010
The Southern Company Par Value $5 Per Share  777,621,764820,372,722 
Alabama Power Company Par Value $40 Per Share  25,475,00030,537,500 
Georgia Power Company Without Par Value  9,261,500 
Gulf Power Company Without Par Value  3,142,7173,642,717 
Mississippi Power Company Without Par Value  1,121,000 
Southern Power Company Par Value $0.01 Per Share  1,000 
Documents incorporated by reference: specified portions of The Southern Company’s Definitive Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A relating to the 20092010 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference into PART III. In addition, specified portions of the Definitive Information Statements on Schedule 14C of Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company, and Mississippi Power Company relating to each of their respective 20092010 Annual Meetings of Shareholders are incorporated by reference into PART III.
Southern Power Company meets the conditions set forth in General Instructions I(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-K and is therefore filing this Form 10-K with the reduced disclosure format specified in General Instructions I(2)(b), (c), and (c)(d) of Form 10-K.
This combined Form 10-K is separately filed by The Southern Company, Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power Company, Mississippi Power Company, and Southern Power Company. Information contained herein relating to any individual company is filed by such company on its own behalf. Each company makes no representation as to information relating to the other companies.
 

 


 

Table of Contents
     
        Page
  PART I  
     
 Business I-1
  The Southern Company System I-2
  Construction Programs I-4
  Financing Programs I-4
  Fuel Supply I-4
  Territory Served by the Traditional Operating Companies and Southern Power I-5
  Competition I-7
  Seasonality I-8
  Regulation I-8
  Rate Matters I-11
  Employee Relations I-13I-15
 Risk Factors I-15I-16
 Unresolved Staff Comments I-26I-27
 Properties I-27I-28
 Legal Proceedings I-31I-32
 Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders I-32
  Executive Officers of Southern Company I-33
  Executive Officers of Alabama Power I-35
  Executive Officers of Georgia Power I-36
  Executive Officers of Mississippi Power I-37
     
  PART II  
     
 Market for Registrants’ Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities II-1
 Selected Financial Data II-2
 Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations II-2
 Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk II-3
 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data II-4
 Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure II-5
 Controls and Procedures II-6
 Controls and Procedures II-6
 Other Information II-7
     
  PART III  
     
 Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance III-1
 Executive Compensation III-4
 Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters III-41III-40
 Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence III-42III-41
 Principal Accountant Fees and Services III-43III-42
     
  PART IV  
     
 Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules IV-1
  Signatures IV-2

i


DEFINITIONS
When used in Items 1 through 5 and Items 9A through 15, the following terms will have the meanings indicated.
   
Term Meaning
AFUDC Allowance for Funds Used During Construction
Alabama Power Alabama Power Company
AMEA Alabama Municipal Electric Authority
Clean Air Act Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
Dalton Dalton Utilities
DOE United States Department of Energy
Duke Energy Duke Energy Corporation
Energy Act of 1992 Energy Policy Act of 1992
Energy Act of 2005 Energy Policy Act of 2005
Energy SolutionsSouthern Company Energy Solutions, Inc.
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
FASBFinancial Accounting Standards Board
FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
FMPA Florida Municipal Power Agency
FP&L Florida Power & Light Company
Georgia Power Georgia Power Company
Gulf Power Gulf Power Company
Hampton City of Hampton, Georgia
IBEW International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
IIC Intercompany Interchange Contract
IPP Independent Power Producer
IRP Integrated Resource Plan
IRS Internal Revenue Service
KUA Kissimmee Utility Authority
MEAG Power Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia
Mirant Mirant Corporation
Mississippi Power Mississippi Power Company
Moody’s Moody’s Investors Service
NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission
OPC Oglethorpe Power Corporation
OUC Orlando Utilities Commission
power pool The operating arrangement whereby the integrated generating resources of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power are subject to joint commitment and dispatch in order to serve their combined load obligations
PowerSouth PowerSouth Energy Cooperative (formerly, Alabama Electric Cooperative, Inc.)
PPA Power Purchase Agreement
Progress Energy Carolinas Carolina Power & Light Company, d/b/a Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.
Progress Energy Florida Florida Power Corporation, d/b/a Progress Energy Florida, Inc.
PSC Public Service Commission
registrants The Southern Company, Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power Company, Mississippi Power Company, and Southern Power Company

ii


DEFINITIONS
(continued)
   
Term Meaning
RFP Request for Proposal
RUS Rural UtilityUtilities Service (formerly Rural Electrification Administration)
S&P Standard and Poor’s, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies
Savannah ElectricSavannah Electric and Power Company (merged into Georgia Power on July 1, 2006)
SCS Southern Company Services, Inc. (the system service company)
SEC Securities and Exchange Commission
SEGCO Southern Electric Generating Company
SEPA Southeastern Power Administration
SERC Southeastern Electric Reliability Council
SMEPA South Mississippi Electric Power Association
Southern Company The Southern Company
Southern Company system Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, Southern Power, SEGCO, Southern Nuclear, SCS, SouthernLINC Wireless, and other subsidiaries
Southern Holdings Southern Company Holdings, Inc.
SouthernLINC Wireless Southern Communications Services, Inc.
Southern Nuclear Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.
Southern Power Southern Power Company
Southern Renewable EnergySouthern Renewable Energy, Inc.
Stone & Webster Stone & Webster, Inc.
traditional operating companies Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power Company, and Mississippi Power Company
TVA Tennessee Valley Authority
Westinghouse Westinghouse Electric Company LLC

iii


CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING
FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements concerning the strategic goals for the wholesale business, retail sales, growth, customer growth, storm damage cost recovery and repairs, fuel cost recovery and other rate actions, environmental regulations and expenditures, earnings, growth, dividend payout ratios, access to sources of capital, projections for postretirement benefit and nuclear decommissioning trust contributions, financing activities, start and completion of construction projects, plans and estimated costs for new generation resources, impacts of adoption of new accounting rules, unrecognized tax benefits related to leveraged lease transactions,potential exemptions from ad valorem taxation of the Kemper IGCC project, impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, impact of healthcare legislation, if any, estimated sales and purchases under new power sale and purchase agreements, and estimated construction and other expenditures. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “could,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “projects,” “predicts,” “potential,” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other similar terminology. There are various factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those suggested by the forward-looking statements; accordingly, there can be no assurance that such indicated results will be realized. These factors include:
the impact of recent and future federal and state regulatory change, including legislative and regulatory initiatives regarding deregulation and restructuring of the electric utility industry, implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, environmental laws including regulation of water quality and emissions of sulfur, nitrogen, mercury, carbon, soot, particulate matter, or coal combustion byproducts and other substances, and also changes in tax and other laws and regulations to which Southern Company and its subsidiaries are subject, as well as changes in application of existing laws and regulations;
current and future litigation, regulatory investigations, proceedings, or inquiries, including the pending EPA civil actions against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, FERC matters, IRS audits, and Mirant matters;
the effects, extent, and timing of the entry of additional competition in the markets in which Southern Company’s subsidiaries operate;
variations in demand for electricity, including those relating to weather, the general economy and recovery from the recent recession, population and business growth (and declines), and the effects of energy conservation measures;
the impact of recent and future federal and state regulatory change, including legislative and regulatory initiatives regarding deregulation and restructuring of the electric utility industry, implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, environmental laws including regulation of water quality and emissions of sulfur, nitrogen, mercury, carbon, soot, or particulate matter and other substances, and also changes in tax and other laws and regulations to which Southern Company and its subsidiaries are subject, as well as changes in application of existing laws and regulations;
current and future litigation, regulatory investigations, proceedings, or inquiries, including the pending EPA civil actions against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, FERC matters, IRS audits, and Mirant matters;
the effects, extent, and timing of the entry of additional competition in the markets in which Southern Company’s subsidiaries operate;
variations in demand for electricity, including those relating to weather, the general economy, population and business growth (and declines), and the effects of energy conservation measures;
 available sources and costs of fuels;
 
 effects of inflation;
 
 ability to control costs;
investment performancecosts and avoid cost overruns during the development and construction of Southern Company’s employee benefit plans;
advances in technology;
state and federal rate regulations and the impact of pending and future rate cases and negotiations, including rate actions relating to fuel and storm restoration cost recovery;
regulatory approvals related to the potential Plant Vogtle expansion, including Georgia PSC and NRC approvals;
the performance of projects undertaken by the non-utility businesses and the success of efforts to invest in and develop new opportunities;
internal restructuring or other restructuring options that may be pursued;
potential business strategies, including acquisitions or dispositions of assets or businesses, which cannot be assured to be completed or beneficial to Southern Company or its subsidiaries;
the ability of counterparties of Southern Company and its subsidiaries to make payments as and when due and to perform as required;
the ability to obtain new short- and long-term contracts with neighboring utilities and other wholesale customers;
the direct or indirect effect on Southern Company’s business resulting from terrorist incidents and the threat of terrorist incidents;
interest rate fluctuations and financial market conditions and the results of financing efforts, including Southern Company’s and its subsidiaries’ credit ratings;
the ability of Southern Company and its subsidiaries to obtain additional generating capacity at competitive prices;
catastrophic events such as fires, earthquakes, explosions, floods, hurricanes, droughts, pandemic health events such as an avian influenza, or other similar occurrences;
the direct or indirect effects on Southern Company’s business resulting from incidents similar to the August 2003 power outage in the Northeast;
the effect of accounting pronouncements issued periodically by standard setting bodies; and
other factors discussed elsewhere herein and in other reports filed by the registrants from time to time with the SEC.facilities;
investment performance of Southern Company’s employee benefit plans and nuclear decommissioning trusts;
advances in technology;
state and federal rate regulations and the impact of pending and future rate cases and negotiations, including rate actions relating to fuel and other cost recovery mechanisms;
regulatory approvals and actions related to the potential Plant Vogtle expansion, including Georgia PSC and NRC approvals and potential DOE loan guarantees;
the performance of projects undertaken by the non-utility businesses and the success of efforts to invest in and develop new opportunities;
internal restructuring or other restructuring options that may be pursued;
potential business strategies, including acquisitions or dispositions of assets or businesses, which cannot be assured to be completed or beneficial to Southern Company or its subsidiaries;
the ability of counterparties of Southern Company and its subsidiaries to make payments as and when due and to perform as required;
the ability to obtain new short- and long-term contracts with wholesale customers;
the direct or indirect effect on Southern Company’s business resulting from terrorist incidents and the threat of terrorist incidents;
interest rate fluctuations and financial market conditions and the results of financing efforts, including Southern Company’s and its subsidiaries’ credit ratings;
the ability of Southern Company and its subsidiaries to obtain additional generating capacity at competitive prices;
catastrophic events such as fires, earthquakes, explosions, floods, hurricanes, droughts, pandemic health events such as influenzas, or other similar occurrences;
the direct or indirect effects on Southern Company’s business resulting from incidents affecting the U.S. electric grid or operation of generating resources;
the effect of accounting pronouncements issued periodically by standard setting bodies; and
other factors discussed elsewhere herein and in other reports filed by the registrants from time to time with the SEC.
The registrants expressly disclaim any obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

iv


PART I
Item 1. BUSINESS
Southern Company was incorporated under the laws of Delaware on November 9, 1945. Southern Company is domesticated under the laws of Georgia and is qualified to do business as a foreign corporation under the laws of Alabama. Southern Company owns all of the outstanding common stock of Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power, each of which is an operating public utility company. The traditional operating companies supply electric service in the states of Alabama, Georgia, Florida, and Mississippi. More particular information relating to each of the traditional operating companies is as follows:
Alabama Poweris a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Alabama on November 10, 1927, by the consolidation of a predecessor Alabama Power Company, Gulf Electric Company, and Houston Power Company. The predecessor Alabama Power Company had been in continuous existence since its incorporation in 1906.
Georgia Powerwas incorporated under the laws of the State of Georgia on June 26, 1930 and was admitted to do business in Alabama on September 15, 1948. Effective July 1, 2006, Savannah Electric, formerly a wholly-owned subsidiary of Southern Company, was merged with and into Georgia Power.
Gulf Poweris a Florida corporation that has had a continuous existence since it was originally organized under the laws of the State of Maine on November 2, 1925. Gulf Power was admitted to do business in Florida on January 15, 1926, in Mississippi on October 25, 1976, and in Georgia on November 20, 1984. Gulf Power became a Florida corporation after being domesticated under the laws of the State of Florida on November 2, 2005.
Mississippi Powerwas incorporated under the laws of the State of Mississippi on July 12, 1972, was admitted to do business in Alabama on November 28, 1972, and effective December 21, 1972, by the merger into it of the predecessor Mississippi Power Company, succeeded to the business and properties of the latter company. The predecessor Mississippi Power Company was incorporated under the laws of the State of Maine on November 24, 1924 and was admitted to do business in Mississippi on December 23, 1924 and in Alabama on December 7, 1962.
In addition, Southern Company owns all of the common stock of Southern Power, which is also an operating public utility company. Southern Power constructs, acquires, owns, and manages generation assets and sells electricity at market-based rates in the wholesale market. Southern Power is a corporation organized under the laws of Delaware on January 8, 2001 and was admitted to do business in the States of Alabama, Florida, and Georgia on January 10, 2001, in the State of Mississippi on January 30, 2001, and in the State of North Carolina on February 19, 2007.
Southern Company also owns all of the outstanding common stock or membership interests of SouthernLINC Wireless, Southern Nuclear, SCS, Southern Holdings, Southern Renewable Energy, and other direct and indirect subsidiaries. SouthernLINC Wireless provides digital wireless communications for use by Southern Company and its subsidiary companies and markets these services to the public and also provides wholesale fiber optic solutions to telecommunication providers in the Southeast. Southern Nuclear operates and provides services to Alabama Power’s and Georgia Power’s nuclear plants.plants and is currently developing new nuclear generation at Plant Vogtle. SCS is the system service company providing, at cost, specialized services to Southern Company and its subsidiary companies. Southern Holdings is an intermediate holding subsidiary for Southern Company’s investments in leveraged leasesleases. Southern Renewable Energy was formed in January 2010 to acquire, own, and various other energy-related businesses.construct renewable generation assets.
Alabama Power and Georgia Power each own 50% of the outstanding common stock of SEGCO. SEGCO is an operating public utility company that owns electric generating units with an aggregate capacity of 1,019,680 kilowatts at Plant Gaston on the Coosa River near Wilsonville, Alabama. Alabama Power and Georgia Power are each entitled to one-half of SEGCO’s capacity and energy. Alabama Power acts as SEGCO’s agent in the operation of SEGCO’s units and furnishes coal to SEGCO as fuel for its units. SEGCO also owns one 230,000 volt transmission line extending from Plant Gaston to the Georgia state line at which point connection is made with the Georgia Power transmission line system.

I-1


transmission line system.
Southern Company’s segment information is included in Note 1112 to the financial statements of Southern Company in Item 8 herein.
The registrants’ Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and all amendments to those reports are made available on Southern Company’s website, free of charge, as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. Southern Company’s internet address is www.southerncompany.com.
The Southern Company System
Traditional Operating Companies
The traditional operating companies own generation, transmission, and distribution facilities. See PROPERTIES in Item 2 herein for additional information on the traditional operating companies’ generating facilities. TheEach company’s transmission facilities of each of the traditional operating companies are connected to the respective company’s own generating plants and other sources of power (including certain generating plants owned by Southern Power) and are interconnected with the transmission facilities of the other traditional operating companies and SEGCO by means of heavy-duty high voltage lines.SEGCO. For information on Georgia Power’sthe State of Georgia’s integrated transmission system, see “Territory Served by the Traditional Operating Companies and Southern Power” herein.
Operating contracts covering arrangementsAgreements in effect with principal neighboring utility systems provide for capacity exchanges, capacity purchases and sales, transfers of economy energy and other similar transactions.transactions that may be entered into from time to time for reasons related to reliability or economics. Additionally, the traditional operating companies have entered into voluntary reliability agreements with the subsidiaries of Entergy Corporation, Florida Electric Power Coordinating Group, and TVA and with Progress Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy, South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, and Virginia Electric and Power Company, each of which provides for the establishment and periodic review of principles and procedures for planning and operation of generation and transmission facilities, maintenance schedules, load retention programs, emergency operations, and other matters affecting the reliability of bulk power supply. The traditional operating companies have joined with other utilities in the Southeast (including some of those referred to above) to form the SERC to augment further the reliability and adequacy of bulk power supply. Through the SERC, the traditional operating companies are represented on the National Electric Reliability Council.
The IIC provides for coordinating operations of the power producing facilitiesutility assets of the traditional operating companies and certain utility assets of Southern Power andare operated as a single integrated electric system, or power pool, pursuant to the capacities available to such companies from non-affiliated sources andIIC. Activities under the IIC are administered by SCS, which acts as agent for the pooling of surplus energy available for interchange. Coordinated operation of the entire interconnected system is conducted through a central power supply coordination office maintained by SCS. The available sources of energy are allocated to the traditional operating companies and Southern PowerPower. The fundamental purpose of the power pool is to provide for the most economical sourcescoordinated operation of powerthe electric facilities in an effort to achieve the maximum possible economies consistent with reliable operation. The resulting benefitsthe highest practicable reliability of service. Subject to service requirements and savingsother operating limitations, system resources are apportioned amongcommitted and controlled through the application of centralized economic dispatch. Under the IIC, each traditional operating company and Southern Power retains its lowest cost energy resources for the benefit of the companies. See MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS – FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “FERC Matters – Intercompany Interchange Contract” of each registrant in Item 7 hereinits own customers and Note 3delivers any excess energy to the financial statementspower pool for use in serving customers of each registrant, all under “FERC Matters – Intercompany Interchange Contract” in Item 8 hereinother traditional operating companies or Southern Power or for information onsale by the settlementpower pool to third parties. The IIC provides for the recovery of specified costs associated with the FERC proceeding related toaffiliated operations thereunder, as well as the IIC.proportionate sharing of costs and revenues resulting from power pool transactions with third parties.
Southern Company, each traditional operating company, Southern Power, Southern Nuclear, SEGCO, and other subsidiaries have contracted with SCS to furnish, at direct or allocated cost and upon request, the following services: general and design engineering, purchasing, accounting and statistical analysis, finance and treasury, tax, information resources, marketing, auditing, insurance and pension administration, human resources, systems and procedures, digital wireless communications, and other services with respect to business and operations and power pool transactions. Southern Power and SouthernLINC Wireless have also secured from the traditional operating companies certain services which are furnished at cost and, in the case of Southern Power which is subject to FERC regulations, in compliance with such regulations.
Alabama Power and Georgia Power each have a contract with Southern Nuclear to operate Plant Farley and Plants

I-2


Hatch and Vogtle, respectively. In addition, Georgia Power has a contract with Southern Nuclear to develop, construct, license, and operate additional generating units at Plant Vogtle. See “Regulation – Nuclear Regulation” herein for additional information.

I-2


Southern Power
Southern Power is an electric wholesale generation subsidiary with market-based rate authority from the FERC. Southern Power constructs, acquires, owns, and manages generation assets and sells electricity at market-based prices in the wholesale market. Southern Power’s business activities are not subject to traditional state regulation like the traditional operating companies but are subject to regulation by the FERC. Southern Power has attempted to insulate itself from significant fuel supply, fuel transportation, and electric transmission risks by making such risks the responsibility of the counterparties to theits PPAs. However, Southern Power’s future earnings will depend on the parameters of the wholesale market, federal regulation, and the efficient operation of its wholesale generating assets. For additional information on Southern Power’s business activities, see MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS – OVERVIEW – “Business Activities” of Southern Power in Item 7 herein.
In June 2008, Southern Power completed construction on Plant Franklin Unit 3 which added 659 megawatts to the Southern Company system generating capacity. In December 2008, Southern Power announced plans to construct a 720 megawatt electric generating plant in North Carolina. This new plant is expected to go into commercial operation in 2012.
On October 8, 2009, Southern Power acquired all of the outstanding membership interests of Nacogdoches Power LLC from American Renewables LLC, the original developer of the project. Nacogdoches Power LLC is constructing a biomass generating plant in Sacul, Texas with an estimated capacity of 100 megawatts. The generating plant will be fueled from wood waste. Construction began in late 2009 and the plant is expected to begin commercial operation in 2012. The total estimated cost of the project is expected to be between $475 million and $500 million. The output of the plant is contracted under a PPA with Austin Energy that begins in 2012 and expires in 2032.
On December 17, 2009, Southern Power acquired all of the outstanding membership interests of West Georgia Generating Company, LLC (West Georgia) from Broadway Gen Funding, LLC, an affiliate of LS Power. West Georgia was merged into Southern Power as of the acquisition date and Southern Power now owns a dual-fueled generating plant near Thomaston, Georgia with nameplate capacity of approximately 669 megawatts. The plant consists of four combustion turbine natural gas generating units with oil back-up. The output from two units is contracted under PPAs with MEAG Power and the Georgia Energy Cooperative (GEC). The MEAG Power PPA began in 2009 and expires in 2029. The GEC PPA begins in 2010 and expires in 2030.
As of December 31, 2008,2009, Southern Power had 7,5557,880 megawatts of nameplate capacity in commercial operation.
Other Businesses
Southern Holdings is an intermediate holding subsidiary for Southern Company’s investments in leveraged leases and various other energy-related businesses.leases.
SouthernLINC Wireless provides digital wireless communications for use by Southern Company and its subsidiary companies and markets its services to non-affiliates within the Southeast. SouthernLINC Wireless delivers multiple wireless communication options including push to talk, cellular service, text messaging, wireless internet access, and wireless data. Its system covers approximately 128,000127,000 square miles in the Southeast. SouthernLINC Wireless also provides wholesale fiber optic solutions to telecommunication providers in the Southeast under the name Southern Telecom.
On January 25, 2010, Southern Renewable Energy was formed to acquire, own, and construct renewable generation assets.
These efforts to invest in and develop new business opportunities offer potential returns exceeding those of rate-regulated operations. However, these activities also involve a higher degree of risk.

I-3


Construction Programs
The subsidiary companies of Southern Company are engaged in continuous construction programs to accommodate existing and estimated future loads on their respective systems. For estimated construction and environmental expenditures for the periods 20092010 through 2011,2012, see Note 7 to the financial statements of Southern Company and each traditional operating company and Southern Power under “Construction Program” and Note 7 to the financial statements of Southern Power under “Expansion Program”, respectively, in Item 8 herein. Estimated construction costs in 20092010 are expected to be apportioned approximately as follows: (in millions)
                        
                        
 Southern           Southern          
 Company Alabama Georgia Gulf Mississippi Southern Company Alabama Georgia Gulf Mississippi Southern
 System* Power Power Power Power Power System* Power Power Power Power Power
              
New generation $1,953 $ $1,209 $6 $48 $690  $2,188 $ $1,254 $3 $341 $590 
Environmental 1,448 584 472 335 28   545 136 259 113 11  
Other generating facilities, including associated plant substations 543 232 178 42 11 59  528 228 154 54 39 37 
New business 411 196 170 29 16   435 169 218 25 23  
Transmission 434 76 313 25 20   461 119 265 45 32  
Distribution 404 157 189 29 30   290 137 110 25 18  
Nuclear fuel 238 90 148     258 111 147    
General plant 222 79 75 12 10   231 85 89 6 8  
              
 $5,653 $1,414 $2,754 $478 $163 $749  $4,936 $985 $2,496 $271 $472 $627 
              
 
* These amounts include the traditional operating companies and Southern Power (as detailed in the table above) as well as the amounts for the other subsidiaries. See “Other Businesses” herein for additional information.
The construction programs are subject to periodic review and revision, and actual construction costs may vary from these estimates because of numerous factors. These factors include: changes in business conditions; changes in load projections; changes in environmental statutes and regulations; changes in nuclear plants to meet new regulatory requirements; changes in FERC rules and regulations; PSC approvals; changes in legislation; the cost and efficiency of construction labor, equipment, and materials; project scope and design changes; and the cost of capital. In addition, there can be no assurance that costs related to capital expenditures will be fully recovered.
Under Georgia law, Georgia Power is required to file an IRP for approval by the Georgia PSC. Through the IRP process, the Georgia PSC must pre-certify the construction of new power plants and new PPAs. See “Rate Matters – Integrated Resource Planning” herein for additional information.
See “Regulation – Environmental Statutes and Regulations” herein for additional information with respect to certain existing and proposed environmental requirements and PROPERTIES – “Jointly-Owned Facilities” in Item 2 herein for additional information concerning Alabama Power’s, Georgia Power’s, and Southern Power’s joint ownership of certain generating units and related facilities with certain non-affiliated utilities.
Financing Programs
See each of the registrant’s MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS – FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY in Item 7 herein and Note 6 to the financial statements of each registrant in Item 8 herein for information concerning financing programs.
Fuel Supply
The traditional operating companies’ and SEGCO’s supply of electricity is derived predominantly from coal. Southern Power’s supply of electricity is primarily fueled by natural gas. See MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS – RESULTS OF OPERATION – “Fuel and Purchased Power Expenses” of Southern Company and each traditional operating company in Item 7 herein for information regarding the electricity generated and the average cost of fuel in cents per net kilowatt-hour generated for the years 20062007 through 2008.2009.

I-4


The traditional operating companies have agreements in place from which they expect to receive approximately 100%98% of their coal burn requirements in 2009.2010. These agreements have terms ranging between one and seveneight years. In 2008,2009, the weighted average sulfur content of all coal burned by the traditional operating companies was 0.74%74% sulfur. This sulfur level, along with banked and purchased sulfur dioxide allowances, allowed the traditional operating companies to remain within limits set by the Phase II acid rain requirements of the Clean Air Act. In 2008,2009, the Southern Company system purchased approximately $63.5$18.3 million of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissionemissions allowances to be used in current and future periods. As additional environmental regulations are proposed that impact the utilization of coal, the traditional operating companies’ fuel mix will be monitored to ensure that the traditional operating companies remain in compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Additionally, Southern Company and the traditional operating companies will continue to evaluate the need to purchase additional emissionemissions allowances and the timing of capital expenditures for emissionemissions control equipment. See MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS – FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “Environmental Matters” of Southern Company and each traditional operating company in Item 7 herein for information on the Clean Air Act and global climate issues.
SCS, acting on behalf of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power, has agreements in place for the natural gas burn requirements of the Southern Company system. For 2009,2010, SCS has contracted for 220207.5 billion cubic feet of natural gas supply. Thesesupply under agreements coverwith remaining terms up to 1011 years. In addition to gas supply, SCS has contracts in place for both firm gas transportation and storage. Management believes that these contracts provide sufficient natural gas supplies, transportation, and storage to ensure normal operations of the Southern Company system’s natural gas generating units.
Changes in fuel prices to the traditional operating companies are generally reflected in fuel adjustment clauses contained in rate schedules. See “Rate Matters – Rate Structure and Cost Recovery Plans” herein for additional information. Southern Power’s PPAs generally provide that the counterparty is responsible for substantially all of the cost of fuel.
Alabama Power and Georgia Power have numerous contracts covering a portion of their nuclear fuel needs for uranium, conversion services, enrichment services, and fuel fabrication. These contracts have varying expiration dates and most of them are for less than 10 years. Management believes that sufficient capacity for nuclear fuel supplies and processing exists to preclude the impairment of normal operations of the Southern Company system’s nuclear generating units.
Alabama Power and Georgia Power have contracts with the United States, acting through the DOE, that provide for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel. The DOE failed to begin disposing of spent fuel in 1998, as required by the contracts, and Alabama Power and Georgia Power are pursuing legal remedies against the government for breach of contract. See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company, Alabama Power, and Georgia Power under “Nuclear Fuel Disposal Costs” in Item 8 herein for additional information.
Territory Served by the Traditional Operating Companies and Southern Power
The territory in which the traditional operating companies provide electric service comprises most of the states of Alabama and Georgia together with the northwestern portion of Florida and southeastern Mississippi. In this territory there are non-affiliated electric distribution systems which obtain some or all of their power requirements either directly or indirectly from the traditional operating companies. The territory has an area of approximately 120,000 square miles and an estimated population of approximately 13 million. Southern Power sells electricity at market-based prices in the wholesale market to investor-owned utilities, IPPs, municipalities, and electric cooperatives.
Alabama Power is engaged, within the State of Alabama, in the generation and purchase of electricity and the transmission, distribution, and sale of such electricity at retail in over 650 communities (including Anniston, Birmingham, Gadsden, Mobile, Montgomery, and Tuscaloosa), as well as in rural areas, and at wholesale to 15 municipally-owned electric distribution systems, 11 of which are served indirectly through sales to AMEA, and two rural distributing cooperative associations. Alabama Power owns coal reserves near its Plant Gorgas and uses the output of coal from the reserves in its generating plants. Alabama Power also sells, and cooperates with dealers in promoting the sale of, electric appliances.

I-5


Georgia Power is engaged in the generation and purchase of electricity and the transmission, distribution, and sale of such electricity within the State of Georgia at retail in over 600 communities (including Athens, Atlanta, Augusta, Columbus, Macon, Rome, and Savannah), as well as in rural areas, and at wholesale currently to OPC, MEAG Power, Dalton, Hampton, and 30various electric cooperatives.membership corporations.
Gulf Power is engaged, within the northwestern portion of Florida, in the generation and purchase of electricity and the transmission, distribution, and sale of such electricity at retail in 71 communities (including Pensacola, Panama City, and Fort Walton Beach), as well as in rural areas, and at wholesale to a non-affiliated utility and a municipality.
Mississippi Power is engaged in the generation and purchase of electricity and the transmission, distribution, and sale of such energyelectricity within 23 counties in southeastern Mississippi, at retail in 123 communities (including Biloxi, Gulfport, Hattiesburg, Laurel, Meridian, and Pascagoula), as well as in rural areas, and at wholesale to one municipality, six rural electric distribution cooperative associations, and one generating and transmitting cooperative.
For information relating to kilowatt-hour sales by customer classification for the traditional operating companies, see MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS – RESULTS OF OPERATIONS of each traditional operating company in Item 7 herein. Also, for information relating to the sources of revenues for Southern Company, each traditional operating company, and Southern Power, reference is made to Item 67 herein.
The RUS has authority to make loans to cooperative associations or corporations to enable them to provide electric service to customers in rural sections of the country. There are 71 electric cooperative organizations operating in the territory in which the traditional operating companies provide electric service at retail or wholesale.
One of these organizations, PowerSouth, is a generating and transmitting cooperative selling power to several distributing cooperatives, municipal systems, and other customers in south Alabama and northwest Florida. PowerSouth owns generating units with approximately 1,776 megawatts of nameplate capacity, including an undivided 8.16% ownership interest in Alabama Power’s Plant Miller Units 1 and 2. PowerSouth’s facilities were financed with RUS loans secured by long-term contracts requiring distributing cooperatives to take their requirements from PowerSouth to the extent such energy is available.
Alabama Power and Gulf Power have entered into separate agreements with PowerSouth involving interconnection between their respective systems. The delivery of capacity and energy from PowerSouth to certain distributing cooperatives in the service areas of Alabama Power and Gulf Power is governed by the Southern Company/PowerSouth Network Transmission Service Agreement. The rates for this service to PowerSouth are on file with the FERC. See PROPERTIES – “Jointly-Owned Facilities” in Item 2 herein for details of Alabama Power’s joint-ownership with PowerSouth of a portion of Plant Miller.
Four electric cooperative associations, financed by the RUS, operate within Gulf Power’s service area. These cooperatives purchase their full requirements from PowerSouth and SEPA (a federal power marketing agency). A non-affiliated utility also operates within Gulf Power’s service area and purchases its full requirements from Gulf Power.
Mississippi Power has an interchange agreement with SMEPA, a generating and transmitting cooperative, pursuant to which various services are provided, including the furnishing of protective capacity by Mississippi Power to SMEPA.
There are also 65 municipally-owned electric distribution systems operating in the territory in which the traditional operating companies provide electric service at retail or wholesale.
Forty-eight municipally-owned electric distribution systems and one county-owned system receive their requirements through MEAG Power, which was established by a Georgia state statute in 1975. MEAG Power serves these requirements from self-owned generation facilities, some of which are acquired and jointly-owned with Georgia Power, power purchased from Georgia Power, and purchases from other resources. MEAG Power also has a pseudo scheduling and services agreement with

I-6


scheduling and services agreement with Georgia Power. Dalton serves its requirements from self-owned generation facilities, some of which are acquired and jointly-owned with Georgia Power, and through purchases from Georgia Power pursuant to their partial requirements tariff.and Southern Power through a service agreement. In addition, Georgia Power serves the full requirements of Hampton’s electric distribution system under a market-based contract. See PROPERTIES – “Jointly-Owned Facilities” in Item 2 herein for additional information.
Georgia Power has entered into substantially similar agreements with Georgia Transmission Corporation (formerly OPC’s transmission division), MEAG Power, and Dalton providing for the establishment of an integrated transmission system to carry the power and energy of all parties. The agreements require an investment by each party in the integrated transmission system in proportion to its respective share of the aggregate system load. See PROPERTIES – “Jointly-Owned Facilities” in Item 2 herein for additional information.
Southern Power has PPAs with some of the traditional operating companies and with other investor ownedinvestor-owned utilities, IPPs, municipalities, and electric cooperatives. See MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS – FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “Power Sales Agreements” of Southern Power in Item 7 herein for additional information concerning Southern Power’s PPAs.
SCS, acting on behalf of the traditional operating companies, also has a contract with SEPA providing for the use of the traditional operating companies’ facilities at government expense to deliver to certain cooperatives and municipalities, entitled by federal statute to preference in the purchase of power from SEPA, quantities of power equivalent to the amounts of power allocated to them by SEPA from certain United States government hydroelectric projects.
The retail service rights of all electric suppliers in the State of Georgia are regulated by the Territorial Electric Service Act of 1973. Pursuant to the provisions of this Act, all areas within existing municipal limits were assigned to the primary electric supplier therein. Areas outside of such municipal limits were either to be assigned or to be declared open for customer choice of supplier by action of the Georgia PSC pursuant to standards set forth in this Act. Consistent with such standards, the Georgia PSC has assigned substantially all of the land area in the state to a supplier. Notwithstanding such assignments, this Act provides that any new customer locating outside of 1973 municipal limits and having a connected load of at least 900 kilowatts may exercise a one-time choice for the life of the premises to receive electric service from the supplier of its choice. See “Competition” herein for additional information.
Pursuant to the 1956 Utility Act, the Mississippi PSC issued “Grandfather Certificates” of public convenience and necessity to Mississippi Power and to six distribution rural cooperatives operating in southeastern Mississippi, then served in whole or in part by Mississippi Power, authorizing them to distribute electricity in certain specified geographically described areas of the state. The six cooperatives serve approximately 325,000 retail customers in a certificated area of approximately 10,300 square miles. In areas included in a “Grandfather Certificate,” the utility holding such certificate may, without further certification, extend its lines up to five miles; other extensions within that area by such utility, or by other utilities, may not be made except upon a showing of, and a grant of a certificate of, public convenience and necessity. Areas included in such a certificate which are subsequently annexed to municipalities may continue to be served by the holder of the certificate, irrespective of whether it has a franchise in the annexing municipality. On the other hand, the holder of the municipal franchise may not extend service into such newly annexed area without authorization by the Mississippi PSC.
Competition
The electric utility industry in the United States is continuing to evolve as a result of regulatory and competitive factors. Among the early primary agents of change was the Energy Act of 1992 which allowed IPPs to access a utility’s transmission network in order to sell electricity to other utilities.
The competition for retail energy sales among competing suppliers of energy is influenced by various factors, including price, availability, technological advancements, service, and reliability. These factors are, in turn, affected by, among other influences, regulatory, political, and environmental considerations, taxation, and supply.
Generally, the traditional operating companies have experienced, and expect to continue to experience, competition

I-7


in their respective retail service territories in varying degrees as the result of self-generation (as described above)below) by

I-7


customers and other factors. See also “Territory Served by the Traditional Operating Companies and Southern Power” herein for additional information concerning suppliers of electricity operating within or near the areas served at retail by the traditional operating companies.
Southern Power competes with investor owned utilities, IPPs, and others for wholesale energy sales primarily in the Southeastern United States wholesale market. The needs of this market are driven by the demands of end users in the Southeast and the generation available. Southern Power’s success in wholesale energy sales is influenced by various factors including reliability and availability of Southern Power’s plants, availability of transmission to serve the demand, price, and Southern Power’s ability to contain costs.
Alabama Power currently has cogeneration contracts in effect with nine11 industrial customers. Under the terms of these contracts, Alabama Power purchases excess generation of such companies. During 2008,2009, Alabama Power purchased approximately 114232 million kilowatt-hours from such companies at a cost of $5.6$16.5 million.
Georgia Power currently has contracts in effect with eightnine small power producers whereby Georgia Power purchases their excess generation. During 2008,2009, Georgia Power purchased 7.214.7 million kilowatt-hours from such companies at a cost of $1.0$0.6 million. Georgia Power has PPAs for electricity with two cogeneration facilities. Payments are subject to reductions for failure to meet minimum capacity output. During 2008,2009, Georgia Power purchased 222.942.3 million kilowatt-hours at a cost of $67.9$19.7 million from these facilities.
Also during 2008,2009, Georgia Power purchased energy from seveneight customer-owned generating facilities. SixSeven of the seveneight customers provide only energy to Georgia Power. These sixseven customers make no capacity commitment and are not dispatched by Georgia Power. Georgia Power does have a contract with the remaining customer for eight megawatts of dispatchable capacity and energy. During 2008,2009, Georgia Power purchased a total of 59.156.3 million kilowatt-hours from the seveneight customers at a cost of approximately $3.0$1.9 million.
Gulf Power currently has agreements in effect with various industrial, commercial, and qualifying facilities pursuant to which Gulf Power purchases “as available” energy from customer-owned generation. During 2008,2009, Gulf Power purchased 41.176 million kilowatt-hours from such companies for approximately $2.7$4.3 million.
Mississippi Power currently has a cogeneration agreement in effect with one of its industrial customers. Under the terms of this contract, Mississippi Power purchases any excess generation. During 2008,2009, Mississippi Power did not purchase any excess generation from this customer had no excess generation.customer.
Seasonality
The demand for electric power generation is affected by seasonal differences in the weather. At the traditional operating companies and Southern Power, the demand for power peaks during the summer months, with market prices reflecting the demand of power and available generating resources at that time. Power demand peaks can also be recorded during the winter. As a result, the overall operating results of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power in the future may fluctuate substantially on a seasonal basis. In addition, Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power have historically sold less power when weather conditions are milder.
Regulation
State Commissions
The traditional operating companies are subject to the jurisdiction of their respective state PSCs. The PSCs have broad powers of supervision and regulation over public utilities operating in the respective states, including their rates, service regulations, sales of securities (except for the Mississippi PSC), and, in the cases of the Georgia PSC and the Mississippi PSC, in part, retail service territories. See “Territory Served by the Traditional Operating Companies and Southern Power” and “Rate Matters” herein for additional information.

I-8


Federal Power Act
The traditional operating companies, Southern Power and its generation subsidiaries, and SEGCO are all public utilities engaged in wholesale sales of energy in interstate commerce and therefore are subject to the rate, financial, and accounting jurisdiction of the FERC under the Federal Power Act. The FERC must approve certain financings and allows an “at cost standard” for services rendered by system service companies such as SCS. The FERC is also authorized to establish regional reliability organizations which are authorized to enforce reliability standards, to address impediments to the construction of transmission, and to prohibit manipulative energy trading practices.
Alabama Power and Georgia Power are also subject to the provisions of the Federal Power Act or the earlier Federal Water Power Act applicable to licensees with respect to their hydroelectric developments. Among the hydroelectric projects subject to licensing by the FERC are 14 existing Alabama Power generating stations having an aggregate installed capacity of 1,662,400 kilowatts and 18 existing Georgia Power generating stations having an aggregate installed capacity of 1,074,6961,087,296 kilowatts.
OnIn May 22, 2008, the FERC issued a new 30-year license for the Morgan Falls project, located on the Chattahoochee River near Atlanta, with an effective start date of March 1, 2009. In 2007, Georgia Power began the relicensing process for Bartlett’s Ferry which is located on the Chattahoochee River near Columbus, Georgia. The current Bartlett’s Ferry license expires in 2014 and the application for a new license is expected to be submitted to the FERC in 2012. In July 2005, Alabama Power filed two applications with the FERC for new 50-year licenses for its seven hydroelectric developments on the Coosa River (Weiss, Henry, Logan Martin, Lay, Mitchell, Jordan, and Bouldin) and for the Lewis Smith and Bankhead developments on the Warrior River. The FERC licenses for all of these nine developments expired in July and August 2007. The FERC issued an annual license for the Coosa developments in August 2007 and issued an annual license for the Warrior developments in September 2007. Both of these licenses were automatically renewed in 2008 and 2009 pursuant to FERC regulations. These annual licenses provide the FERC with additional time to complete its review of the license applications. In 2006, Alabama Power initiated the process of developing an application to relicense the Martin hydroelectric project located on the Tallapoosa River. The current Martin license will expire in 2013 and the application for a new license is expected to be filed with the FERC in 2011. In 2010, Alabama Power plans to initiate the process of developing an application to relicense the Holt hydroelectric project located on Warrior River. The current Holt license will expire in August 2015 and the application for a new license is expected to be filed prior to that time. See MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS – FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “FERC Matters – Hydro Relicensing”Matters” of Alabama Power in Item 7 herein for additional information.
Georgia Power and OPC also have a license, expiring in 2027, for the Rocky Mountain Plant, a pure pumped storage facility of 847,800 kilowatt capacity. See PROPERTIES – “Jointly-Owned Facilities” in Item 2 herein for additional information.
Licenses for all projects, excluding those discussed above, expire in the period 2015-20342023-2034 in the case of Alabama Power’s projects and in the period 2014-2039 in the case of Georgia Power’s projects.
Upon or after the expiration of each license, the United States Government, by act of Congress, may take over the project or the FERC may relicense the project either to the original licensee or to a new licensee. In the event of takeover or relicensing to another, the original licensee is to be compensated in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Power Act, such compensation to reflect the net investment of the licensee in the project, not in excess of the fair value of the property, plus reasonable damages to other property of the licensee resulting from the severance therefrom of the property. If the FERC does not act on the new license application prior to the expiration of the existing license, the FERC is required to issue annual licenses, under the same terms and conditions of the existing license, until a new license is issued.
Nuclear Regulation
Alabama Power, Georgia Power, and Southern Nuclear are subject to regulation by the NRC. The NRC is responsible for licensing and regulating nuclear facilities and materials and for conducting research in support of the licensing and regulatory process, as mandated by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended; and the Nuclear Nonproliferation Act of 1978; and in accordance with the

I-9


National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and other applicable statutes. These responsibilities also include protecting public health and safety, protecting the environment, protecting and safeguarding nuclear

I-9


materials and nuclear power plants in the interest of national security, and assuring conformity with antitrust laws.
The NRC operating licenses for Plant Vogtle units 1 and 2 currently expire in January 2027 and February 2029, respectively. In January 2002, the NRC granted Georgia Power a 20-year extension of the licenses for both units at Plant Hatch which permits the operation of units 1 and 2 until 2034 and 2038, respectively. Georgia Power filed an application with the NRC in June 2007 to extend the licenses for Plant Vogtle units 1 and 2 for an additional 20 years. Georgia Power anticipates the NRC may make a decision regarding the license extension for Plant Vogtle in 2009. In May 2005, the NRC granted Alabama Power a 20-year extension of the licenses for both units at Plant Farley which permits operation of units 1 and 2 until 2037 and 2041, respectively. On June 3, 2009, the NRC approved 20-year extensions of the licenses for the operation of Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2 to 2047 and 2049, respectively.
InOn August 2006,26, 2009, the NRC issued an Early Site Permit and Limited Work Authorization to Southern Nuclear, on behalf of Georgia Power, OPC, MEAG Power, and Dalton (collectively, Owners), filed an application with the NRC for an early site permit approvingrelated to two additional nuclear units on the site of Plant Vogtle. See Note 4 to the financial statements of Southern CompanyVogtle (Plant Vogtle Units 3 and Georgia Power in Item 8 herein for additional information on these co-owners. On4). In March 31, 2008, Southern Nuclear filed an application with the NRC for a combined construction and operating license for Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4, which, if licensed by the new units.
On April 8, 2008, Georgia Power, acting for itselfNRC, are scheduled to be placed in service in 2016 and as agent for the Owners, and a consortium consisting of Westinghouse and Stone & Webster (collectively, Consortium) entered into an engineering, procurement, and construction agreement to design, engineer, procure, construct, and test two AP1000 nuclear units with electric generating capacity of approximately 1,100 megawatts each and related facilities, structures, and improvements at Plant Vogtle.2017, respectively. See MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL “Construction Projects” of Southern Company and MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS – FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “Nuclear Construction”Nuclear” of Georgia Power in Item 7 herein and Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Georgia Power — Nuclear Construction” and Georgia Power under “Nuclear” and “Nuclear Construction,” respectively“Construction — Nuclear” in Item 8 herein for additional information.
See Notes 1 and 9 to the financial statements of Southern Company, Alabama Power, and Georgia Power in Item 8 herein for information on nuclear decommissioning costs and nuclear insurance.
FERC Matters
See MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS – FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “FERC Matters” of each of the registrants in Item 7 herein for information on matters regarding the FERC.
Environmental Statutes and Regulations
Southern Company’s operations are subject to extensive regulation by state and federal environmental agencies under a variety of statutes and regulations governing environmental media, including air, water, and land resources. Compliance with these existing environmental requirements involves significant capital and operating costs, a major portion of which is expected to be recovered through existing ratemaking provisions.provisions or market-based rates for Southern Power. There is no assurance, however, that all such costs will be recovered.
Compliance with the federal Clean Air Act and resulting regulations has been, and will continue to be, a significant focus for Southern Company, each traditional operating company, Southern Power, and SEGCO. In addition, existing environmental laws and regulations may be changed or new laws and regulations may be adopted or otherwise become applicable to Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, Southern Power, or SEGCO, including laws and regulations designed to address global climate change, air quality, water quality, management of waste materials and coal combustion byproducts, including coal ash, or other environmental, public health, and welfare concerns. See MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL “Environmental Matters” of Southern Company and each of the traditional operating companies in Item 7 herein for additional information about the Clean Air Act and other environmental issues, including, but not limited to, the litigation brought by the EPA under the New Source Review provisions of the Clean Air Act, possible additional and/or revised regulations related to air and water quality, possible climate change legislation and regulation.regulation, and possible regulation of coal combustion byproducts. Also see MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL “Environmental Matters” of Southern Power in Item 7 herein for information about the environmental issues and possible climate change legislation and regulation.

I-10


Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, Southern Power, and SEGCO are unable to predict at this time what additional steps they may be required to take as a result of the implementation of existing or future requirements pertaining to climate change, air quality, water quality, and management of waste materials and coal combustion byproducts, including coal ash, but such steps could adversely affect system operations and result in substantial additional costs.
The outcome of the matters mentioned above under “Regulation” cannot now be determined, except that these developments may affect unit retirement and replacement decisions and may result in delays in obtaining appropriate licenses for generating facilities, increased construction and operating costs, or reduced generation, the nature and extent of which, while not determinable at this time, could be substantial.

I-10


Rate Matters
Rate Structure and Cost Recovery Plans
The rates and service regulations of the traditional operating companies are uniform for each class of service throughout their respective service areas. Rates for residential electric service are generally of the block type based upon kilowatt-hours used and include minimum charges. Residential and other rates contain separate customer charges. Rates for commercial service are presently of the block type and, for large customers, the billing demand is generally used to determine capacity and minimum bill charges. These large customers’ rates are generally based upon usage by the customer and include rates with special features to encourage off-peak usage. Additionally, Alabama Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power are generally allowed by their respective state PSCs to negotiate the terms and cost of service to large customers. Such terms and cost of service, however, are subject to final state PSC approval.
Fuel and net purchased energy costs are recovered through specific fuel cost recovery provisions at the traditional operating companies. These fuel cost recovery provisions are adjusted to reflect increases or decreases in such costs as needed. Gulf Power’s and Mississippi Power’s fuel cost recovery provisions are adjusted annually to reflect increases or decreases in such costs. Georgia Power expects to filefiled for an adjustment to its fuel cost recovery rate on March 13,December 15, 2009. If approved by the Georgia PSC, the adjustment would be effective on April 1, 2010. Alabama Power’s fuel clause is adjusted as required. Revenues are adjusted for differences between recoverable costs and amounts actually recovered in current rates.
Approved environmental compliance and storm damage costs are recovered at Alabama Power, Gulf Power and Mississippi Power through cost recovery provisions approved by their respective state PSCs. Within limits approved by their respective PSCs, these rates are adjusted to reflect increases or decreases in such costs as required.
Georgia Power’s environmental compliance costs wereare recovered in base rates through 2007.rates. Under the 2007 retail rate plan, an environmental compliance cost recovery tariff was implemented effective January 1, 2008 to allow for recovery of most of theenvironmental costs related to environmental controls scheduled for completion between 2008 and 2010 that are mandated by state and federal regulation. See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Georgia Power has also requested that the— Retail Rate Plans” and Georgia Power under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Rate Plans” in Item 8 herein for additional information.
See “Integrated Resource Planning” herein for a discussion of Georgia PSC certify the constructioncertification of environmental controlsnew demand-side or supply-side resources for Plants Branch and Hammond. Georgia Power also continues to recover storm damage and new plant costs through its base rates. SeePower. In addition, see MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL “Construction Projects — Nuclear” of Southern Company and MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS – FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “Nuclear — Construction” of Georgia Power in Item 7 herein and Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Georgia Power — Nuclear Construction” and Georgia Power under “Construction — Nuclear” in Item 8 herein for information regarding legislation currently being considered ina discussion of the StateGeorgia Nuclear Financing Act and the Georgia PSC certification of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4, which allow Georgia Power to allow recovery ofrecover financing costs for construction of the new nuclear construction projectsunits during the construction period.period beginning in 2011.
Alabama Power recovers the cost of certificated new plant and purchased power capacity and Gulf Power recovers purchased power capacity and conservation costs through cost recovery provisions which are adjusted as requiredapproved annually. Gulf Power files a rate clause request annually with the Florida PSC to reflect increases or decreases in suchrecover costs as needed.associated with purchased power capacity, energy conservation, and environmental compliance. Revenues are adjusted for differences between recoverable costs and amounts actually recovered in current rates.
See MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL “PSC Matters” of Southern Company and each of the traditional operating companies in Item 7 herein and Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company under “Alabama Power Retail Regulatory Matters” and “Georgia Power Retail

I-11


“Retail Regulatory Matters” and Note 3 to the financial statements of each of the traditional operating companies under “Retail Regulatory Matters” in Item 8 herein for a discussion of rate matters. Also, see Note 1 to the financial statements of Southern Company and each of the traditional operating companies in Item 8 herein for a discussion of recovery of fuel costs, storm damage costs, and environmental compliance costs through rates.
The traditional operating companies and Southern Power are authorized by the FERC to sell power to non-affiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices. Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based contract with an affiliate. See MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS – FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “FERC Matters – Market-Based Rate Authority” of each registrant in Item 7 herein and Note 3 to the financial statements of each registrant under “FERC Matters – Market-Based Rate Authority” in Item 8 herein for a discussion of rate matters.

I-11


Integrated Resource Planning
Georgia Power
Triennially, Georgia Power must file an IRP with the Georgia PSC that specifies how it intends to meet the future electrical needs of its customers through a combination of demand-side and supply-side resources. The Georgia PSC, under state law, willmust certify any new demand-side or supply-side resources.resources for Georgia Power to get cost recovery. Once certified, the lesser of actual or certified construction costs and purchased power costs will be recoverable through rates.
In July 2007, the Georgia PSC approved Georgia Power’s 2007 IRP including the following provisions: (1) retiring the coal units at Plant McDonough and replacing them with combined-cycle natural gas units; (2) approving new energy efficiency pilot programs and rate recovery of demand-side management programs; (3) approving pursuit of up to three new renewable generation projects with a Georgia Power ownership interest; and (4) establishing new nuclear units as a preferred option to meet demand in the 2015/2016 timeframe (2007 IRP Order).
On August 1, 2008,31, 2009, Georgia Power filed with the Georgia PSC an applicationits first semi-annual construction monitoring report for the certification of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 andfor the 2008 IRP update (Updated IRP). The application requested thatperiod ended June 30, 2009, which did not include any proposed change to the estimated construction cost as certified by the Georgia PSC takein March 2009. On February 25, 2010, the following actions: (1) certifyGeorgia PSC approved the proposedexpenditures made by Georgia Power pursuant to the certification through June 30, 2009. The Georgia PSC also ordered that in its future semi-annual construction monitoring reports, Georgia Power will report against a total certified cost of approximately $6.1 billion, which is the effective certified amount after giving effect to the Georgia Nuclear Energy Financing Act. Georgia Power will continue to file construction monitoring reports by February 28 and August 31 of each year during the construction period.
In connection with its approval of the updated IRP on March 17, 2009, the Georgia PSC also approved Georgia Power’s plan for the installation of emissions controls at its Plant VogtleBranch Units 1 — 4 and Plant Yates Units 6 and 7. However, Georgia Power has suspended further engineering and construction activity on the emissions control projects at Plant Branch Units 1 and 2 and Plant Yates Units 6 and 7 until more information is available from the rulemaking and legislative process, thereby mitigating the risk related to significant capital expenditures associated with those projects. Georgia Power continues to review the economic feasibility of installing controls at Plant Branch Units 3 and 4; (2) approve4. Georgia Power intends to continue to operate these units in the Updated IRP; (3) allow construction work in progress in rate base for Plant Vogtle Units 3near term and 4; (4) institute quarterly construction monitoring and treatmentreevaluate the economics of indexed costs; (5) approve Georgia Power’s recommendation to installinstalling emissions controls at Plants Branch and Yates; and (6) approve the deferral for later cost recovery of the significant expenses incurred in developing and evaluating coal-fired generation,on these units as required by the 2007 IRP Order. The Georgia PSC is scheduled to render a decision in March 2009.more information becomes available.
Georgia Power alsoplans to convert the 155-megawatt coal-fired Plant Mitchell Unit 3 to a renewable biomass facility fueled primarily with wood chips. Georgia Power filed a request for approval of the certification of the Plant Mitchell biomass conversion with the Georgia PSC in August 2008. On March 17, 2009, the Georgia PSC approved Georgia Power’s request for certification of the Plant Mitchell biomass conversion. Georgia Power filed an air permit application for certificationthe conversion with the Georgia Environmental Protection Division in December 2008. Georgia Power expects to convertbe granted an air permit in 15 to 18 months from the coal-fired unitfiling date. With the uncertainty of how future EPA regulations might affect allowable industrial boiler emissions, Georgia Power has decided to delay the conversion of Plant Mitchell Unit 3 to biomass until the EPA rules are better defined, which is expected in April 2010. Georgia Power had originally planned to begin retrofit construction at Plant Mitchell to a renewable wood biomass facility which would begin servicein April 2011 with the unit becoming operational in June 2012. A new project schedule has yet to be determined.
On January 29, 2010, Georgia Power filed its 2010 IRP for approval by the Georgia PSC. The 2010 IRP projected that Georgia PSC is scheduledPower’s current supply-side and demand-side resources are sufficient to renderprovide a decision in March 2009. If certified, constructioncost effective and reliable source of capacity and energy at least through 2014. The 2010 IRP identifies potential regulations relating to coal combustion byproducts and maximum achievable control technology for hazardous air pollutants, as well as potential legislation or regulations that would impose mandatory restrictions on this conversion is expected to begin in the spring of 2011.
greenhouse gas emissions. See MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “Construction Projects - Nuclear” of Southern Company— “Environmental Matters — Environmental Statutes and MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS – FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “NuclearRegulationsConstruction”Air Quality,” “Environmental Matters — Environmental Statutes and Regulations — Coal Combustion Byproducts,” and “Environmental Matters — Global Climate Issues” of Georgia Power in Item 7 herein. While neither proposed nor final EPA regulations have been released at this time with respect to hazardous air pollutants or coal combustion byproducts, Georgia Power currently estimates that compliance would be required by about January 2015. The 2010 IRP includes preliminary retirement studies under a variety of potential scenarios for units at seven of Georgia Power’s coal-fired generating plants. These studies indicated that, depending on the final requirements in both of these anticipated EPA regulations and any legislation or regulation relating to greenhouse gas emissions, as well as estimates of long-term fuel prices, Georgia Power may conclude that it is more economical to retire certain coal-fired generating units than to install the required controls and/or that Georgia Power may not be able to complete installation of required controls on all such units by 2015 where such installation is determined to be more economical. Given the uncertainty and the amount of capacity at

I-12


risk of retirement, Georgia Power has restarted its 2015 RFP for 1,000 megawatts of capacity and energy. However, Georgia Power’s capacity needs could change significantly depending on the final requirements resulting from these environmental regulations.
The Georgia PSC certified the construction of Plant McDonough Units 4, 5, and 6 (natural gas-fired units) and the retirement of Plant McDonough Units 1 and 2 (coal-fired units) in 2007. On August 10, 2009, Georgia Power filed its quarterly construction monitoring report for Plant McDonough Units 4, 5, and 6 for the quarter ended June 30, 2009. On September 30, 2009, Georgia Power amended the report. As amended, the report includes a request for an increase in the certified costs to construct Plant McDonough. The Georgia PSC held a hearing in December 2009 and is scheduled to render its decision on March 16, 2010.
The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Georgia Power in Item 8 herein for additional information regarding the proposed Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4.
Gulf Power
Annually by April 1, Gulf Power must file a 10-year site plan with the Florida PSC containing Gulf Power’s estimate of its power-generating needs in the period and the general location of its proposed power plant sites. The 10-year site plans submitted by the state’s electric utilities are reviewed by the Florida PSC and subsequently classified as either “suitable” or “unsuitable.” The Florida PSC then reports its findings along with any suggested revisions to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection for its consideration at any subsequent electrical power plant site certification proceedings. Under Florida law, any 10-year site plans submitted by an electric utility are considered tentative information for planning purposes only and may be amended at any time at the discretion of the utility with written notification to the Florida PSC. At least every five years, the Florida PSC must conduct proceedings to establish numerical goals for all investor-owned electric utilities and certain municipal or cooperative electric utilities in the state to reduce the growth rates of weather-sensitive peak demand, to reduce and control the growth rates of electric consumption, and to increase the conservation of expensive resources, such as petroleum fuels. Overall residential kilowatts and kilowatt hours goals and overall commercial/industrial kilowatt and kilowatt hours goals for each utility are set by the Florida PSC for each year over a 10-year period. The goals are to be based on an estimate of the total cost effective kilowatts and kilowatt hours savings reasonably achievable through demand-side management in each utility’s service area over a 10-year period. Once goals have been set, each affected utility must develop and submit plans and programs to meet the overall goals within its service area to the Florida PSC for review and approval. Once approved, the utilities are required to submit periodic reports which the Florida PSC then uses to prepare its annual report to the Governor and Legislature of the goals that have been established and the progress towards meeting those goals.
Gulf Power’s most recent 10-year site plan was classified by the Florida PSC as “suitable” in December 2009. Gulf Power’s most recent 10-year site plan and environmental compliance plan identify potential environmental regulations relating to maximum achievable control technology for hazardous air pollutants and potential legislation or regulation that would impose mandatory restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions. See MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “Environmental Matters — Environmental Statutes and Regulations — Air Quality,” “Environmental Matters — Environmental Statutes and Regulations — Coal Combustion Byproducts,” and “Environmental Matters — Global Climate Issues” of Gulf Power in Item 7 herein. The site plan and environmental compliance plan include preliminary retirement studies under a variety of potential scenarios for units at each of Gulf Power’s coal-fired generating plants. These studies indicate that, depending on the final requirements in these anticipated EPA regulations and any legislation or regulations relating to greenhouse gas emissions, as well as estimates of long-term fuel prices, Gulf Power may conclude that it is more economical to retire certain of its coal-fired generating units prior to 2020 and to replace such units with new or purchased capacity.
Also in December 2009, the Florida PSC adopted new numerical conservation goals for Gulf Power along with other electric utilities in the state. The Florida PSC adopted more aggressive goals due in part to the consideration of possible greenhouse gas emissions costs incurred in connection with possible climate change legislation and a change in the manner in which the Florida PSC considers the effect of so-called “free-riders” on the level of

I-13


conservation reasonably achievable through utility programs. Gulf Power’s plans and programs to meet the new goals are scheduled to be submitted to the Florida PSC for review by the end of the first quarter 2010. The costs of implementing Gulf Power’s conservation plans and programs are recovered through specific conservation recovery rates set annually by the Florida PSC.
The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Mississippi Power
On December 7, 2009, Mississippi Power filed its 2010 IRP with the Mississippi PSC. The filing was made in connection with the Mississippi PSC certification proceedings relating to the proposed Kemper County IGCC project. In the 2010 IRP, Mississippi Power projected that it will have a need for new capacity in the 2013 to 2015 timeframe. The 2010 IRP indicated a need range of approximately 200 megawatts to 300 megawatts in 2014, which reflects growth in load and the anticipated retirement of older gas steam units Plant Eaton Units 1 through 3 and Plant Watson Units 1 through 3 in 2012 and 2013, respectively. In addition, due to potential retirements of existing coal units, the Mississippi PSC found a need in 2015 that ranges from 304 megawatts to 1,276 megawatts.
The range of needs for 2015 is based on potential environmental regulations relating to maximum achievable control technology for hazardous air pollutants, as well as potential legislation or regulations that would impose mandatory restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions. See MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “Environmental Matters — Environmental Statutes and Regulations — Air Quality” and “Environmental Matters — Global Climate Issues” of Mississippi Power in Item 7 herein. Depending on the final requirements in the anticipated EPA regulations and any legislation or regulation relating to greenhouse gas emissions, as well as estimates of long-term fuel prices, Mississippi Power may conclude that it is more economical to discontinue burning coal at certain coal-fired generating units than to install the required controls.
Mississippi Power’s 2010 IRP indicated that Mississippi Power plans to construct the Kemper County IGCC to meet its identified needs, to add environmental controls at Plant Daniel Units 1 and 2, to defer environmental controls at Plant Watson Units 4 and 5, and to continue operation of the combined cycle Plant Daniel Units 3 and 4.
The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Mississippi Base Load Construction Legislation
In the 2008 regular session of the Mississippi legislature, a bill was passed and signed by the Governor onin May 9, 2008 to enhance the Mississippi PSC’s authority to facilitate development and construction of base load generation in the State of Mississippi (Baseload Act). The Baseload Act authorizes, but does not require, the Mississippi PSC to adopt a cost recovery mechanism that includes in retail base rates, prior to and during construction, all or a portion of the prudently incurred pre-construction and construction costs incurred by a utility in constructing a base load electric generating plant. Prior to the passage of the Baseload Act, such costs would traditionally be recovered only after the plant was placed in service. The Baseload Act also provides for periodic prudence reviews by the Mississippi PSC and prohibits the cancellation of any such generating plant without the approval of the Mississippi PSC. In the event of cancellation of the construction of the plant without approval of the Mississippi PSC, the Baseload Act authorizes the Mississippi PSC to make a public interest

I-12


determination as to whether and to what extent the utility will be afforded rate recovery for costs incurred in connection with such cancelled generating plant. The effect of this legislation on Southern Company and Mississippi Power cannot now be determined.
On January 16, 2009, Mississippi Power filed for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity with the Mississippi PSC to allow construction of a new electric generating plant located in Kemper County, Mississippi. As part of its filing,This certificate, if approved by the Mississippi PSC, would authorize Mississippi Power has requestedto acquire, construct, and operate the Kemper IGCC and related facilities. The Kemper IGCC, subject to federal and state reviews and certain rate recovery treatmentregulatory approvals, is expected to begin commercial operation in accordance withMay 2014. See Note 3 to the base load construction legislation. See MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS – FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “Construction Projects – Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle” and “Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle”financial statements of Southern Company and Mississippi Power respectively, in Item 78 herein for additional information.

I-14


Employee Relations
The Southern Company system had a total of 27,27626,112 employees on its payroll at December 31, 2008.2009.
     
 
 Employees at December 31, 20082009
 
Alabama Power  6,9976,842 
Georgia Power*Power  9,3378,599 
Gulf Power  1,3421,365 
Mississippi Power  1,3171,285 
SCS  4,5364,184 
Southern Holdings**   
Southern Nuclear  3,3463,485 
Southern Power***   
Other  401352 
 
Total  27,27626,112 
 
 
*Georgia Power has initiated a voluntary attrition plan under which participating employees may elect to resign from their positions as of March 31, 2009. Approximately 700 employees who have indicated an interest in participating in the plan have been selected by Georgia Power and are permitted to resign and receive severance. The ultimate number of employees who resign under the plan cannot be determined at this time.
** Southern Holdings has agreements with SCS whereby all employee services are rendered at cost.
 
** Southern Power has no employees. Southern Power has agreements with SCS and the traditional operating companies whereby employee services are rendered at amounts in compliance with FERC regulations.
The traditional operating companies have separate agreements with local unions of the IBEW generally covering wages, working conditions, and procedures for handling grievances and arbitration. These agreements apply with certain exceptions to operating, maintenance, and construction employees.
On August 15, 2009, a five-year labor agreement between Alabama Power has agreementsand nine local unions with the IBEW onexpired. Prior to the expiration of this agreement, Alabama Power and the IBEW entered into a new five-year contract extending tolabor agreement with a ratification date of May 29, 2009. Parts of this new agreement took effect on August 15, 2009.2009, when the original agreement expired, and the remainder took effect on January 1, 2010. The new agreement expires on August 15, 2014.
Georgia Power has an agreement with the IBEW covering wages and working conditions, which is in effect through June 30, 2011. Upon notice given at least 60 days prior to that date, negotiations may be initiated with respect to agreement terms to be effective after such date.
GeorgiaThe agreement between Gulf Power had an agreement withand the IBEW covering wages and working conditions which was in effect through June 30, 2008.scheduled to expire on October 15, 2009. The terms of the expired agreement are still being followed while negotiations on a new agreement are ongoing.
Gulf Power has an agreement with the IBEW covering wagesnot been terminated by either party and working conditions, which isremains in effect through October 14, 2009. Upon notice given at least 60 days prior to that date, negotiations may be initiated with respect to2010. Negotiations for a new agreement terms to be effective after such date.began in September 2009 and are on-going.
Mississippi Power has an agreement with the IBEW covering wages and working conditions, which is in effect until

I-13


August 16, 2010. Upon notice given at least 60 days prior to that date, negotiations may be initiated with respect to agreement terms to be effective after such date.
Southern Nuclear and the IBEW continue in negotiations to ratifyratified a new labor agreement for certain employees at Plants Hatch and Vogtle.Vogtle on May 21, 2009. The three-year agreement that was set to expire onis effective through June 30, 2008 was extended for one year2011. A five-year agreement between Southern Nuclear and remains in full effect. A three-year agreement with the IBEW representing certain employees at Plant Farley iswas ratified on July 8, 2009. The agreement became effective on August 15, 2009 and will remain in effect through August 15, 2009. Upon notice given at least 60 days prior to August 15, 2009, negotiations may be initiated with respect to a new agreement after such date.2014.
The agreements also subjectmake the terms of the pension plans for the companies discussed above subject to collective bargaining with the unions at either a five-year or a 10-year cycle, depending upon union and company actions.

I-14I-15


Item 1A. RISK FACTORS
In addition to the other information in this Form 10-K, including MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS – FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL in Item 7 of each registrant, and other documents filed by Southern Company and/or its subsidiaries with the SEC from time to time, the following factors should be carefully considered in evaluating Southern Company and its subsidiaries. Such factors could affect actual results and cause results to differ materially from those expressed in any forward-looking statements made by, or on behalf of, Southern Company and/or its subsidiaries.
Risks Related to the Energy Industry
Southern Company and its subsidiaries are subject to substantial governmental regulation. Compliance with current and future regulatory requirements and procurement of necessary approvals, permits, and certificates may result in substantial costs to Southern Company and its subsidiaries.
Southern Company and its subsidiaries, including the traditional operating companies and Southern Power, are subject to substantial regulation from federal, state, and local regulatory agencies. Southern Company and its subsidiaries are required to comply with numerous laws and regulations and to obtain numerous permits, approvals, and certificates from the governmental agencies that regulate various aspects of their businesses, including customer rates and charges, service regulations, retail service territories, sales of securities, asset acquisitions and sales, accounting policies and practices, and the operation of fossil-fuel, hydroelectric, and nuclear generating facilities. For example, the rates charged to wholesale customers by the traditional operating companies and by Southern Power must be approved by the FERC and failureFERC. These wholesale rates could be affected absent the ability to maintainconduct business pursuant to FERC market-based rate authority may impact the rates charged to wholesale customers.authority. Additionally, the respective state PSCs must approve the traditional operating companies’ requested rates for retail customers. While the retail rates approved byof the respective state PSCstraditional operating companies are designed to provide for the full recovery of costs and(including a reasonable return on invested capital,capital), there can be no assurance that a state PSC, in a future rate proceeding, will not deemattempt to alter the timing or amount of certain costs for which recovery is sought or to be imprudently incurred and not subject to recovery.modify the current authorized rate of return.
Southern Company and its subsidiaries believe the necessary permits, approvals, and certificates have been obtained for their respective existing operations and that their respective businesses are conducted in accordance with applicable laws; however, the impact of any future revision or changes in interpretations of existing regulations or the adoption of new laws and regulations applicable to Southern Company or any of its subsidiaries cannot now be predicted. Changes in regulation or the imposition of additional regulations could influence the operating environment of Southern Company and its subsidiaries and may result in substantial costs.
Risks Related to Environmental and Climate Change Legislation and Regulation
Southern Company’s, and the traditional operating companies’, and Southern Power’s costs of compliance with environmental laws are significant. The costs of compliance with future environmental laws, including laws and regulations designed to address global climate change, and renewable energy standards, air quality, coal combustion byproducts, and other matters and the incurrence of environmental liabilities could affect unit retirement decisions and negatively impact the net income, cash flows, and financial condition of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, or Southern Power.
Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power are subject to extensive federal, state, and local environmental requirements which, among other things, regulate air emissions, water usage and discharges, and the management of hazardous and solid waste in order to adequately protect the environment. Compliance with these legal requirements requires Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power to commit significant expenditures for installation of pollution control equipment, environmental monitoring, emissions fees, and permits at all of their respective facilities. These expenditures are significant and Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power expect that they will increase in the future. Through 2008,2009, Southern Company had invested approximately $6.3$7.5 billion in capital projects to comply with these requirements, with annual totals of $1.3 billion, $1.6 billion, and $1.5 billion for 2009, 2008, and $661 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Southern Company expects that capital expenditures to assure compliance with existing and new statutes and regulations will be an additional $1.4 billion, $737$545 million, $721 million, and $871 million$1.2 billion for 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2011, 2012,

I-16


respectively. Because Southern Company’sthe compliance strategy is impacted by changes to existing environmental

I-15


laws, statutes, and regulations, the cost, availability, and existing inventory of emissionemissions allowances, and Southern Company’sthe fuel mix, the ultimate outcome cannot be determined at this time.
If Southern Company, any traditional operating company, or Southern Power fails to comply with environmental laws and regulations, even if caused by factors beyond its control, that failure may result in the assessment of civil or criminal penalties and fines. The EPA has filed civil actions against Alabama Power and Georgia Power and issued notices of violation to Gulf Power and Mississippi Power alleging violations of the new source review provisions of the Clean Air Act. Southern Company is a party to suits alleging emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, contribute to global warming. An adverse outcome in any of these casesmatters could require substantial capital expenditures that cannot be determined at this time and could possibly require payment of substantial penalties. Such expenditures could affect unit retirement and replacement decisions, and results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.rates or market-based rates for Southern Power.
Litigation over environmental issues and claims of various types, including property damage, personal injury, common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of environmental requirements such as opacity and air and water quality standards, has increased generally throughout the United States. In particular, personal injury and other claims for damages caused by alleged exposure to hazardous materials, and common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas and other emissions, have become more frequent.
Existing environmental laws and regulations may be revised or new laws and regulations related to global climate change, air quality, coal combustion byproducts, including coal ash, or other environmental and health concerns may be adopted or become applicable to Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power. For example, federal legislative proposals that would impose mandatory requirements on greenhouse gas emissions and renewable energy standards continue to be stronglyactively considered in Congress, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has been identified as a high priority by the current Administration. In addition, some states, including Florida, are considering or have undertaken actions to regulateOn June 26, 2009, the American Clean Energy and reduceSecurity Act of 2009, which would impose mandatory greenhouse gas emissions.restrictions through implementation of a cap and trade program, a renewable energy standard, and other measures, was passed by the House of Representatives. Similar legislation is being considered by the Senate. In 2007, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that the EPA has authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles. On December 15, 2009, the EPA published a final determination, which became effective on January 14, 2010, that certain greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles endanger public health and welfare due to climate change. The EPA has stated that finalization of this rule will cause carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to become regulated pollutants under certain provisions of the Clean Air Act applicable to stationary sources, including power plants. On October 27, 2009, the EPA published a proposed rule governing how these programs would be applied to such sources. The EPA has stated that it expects to finalize these proposed rules in March 2010.
In addition, the EPA is expected to issue additional regulations and designations with respect to air quality under the Clean Air Act, including eight-hour ozone standards, sulfur dioxide standards, a replacement Clean Air Interstate Rule relating to nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide emissions, and a Maximum Achievable Control Technology rule for coal and oil-fired electric generating units, which will likely address numerous hazardous air pollutants, including mercury.
In addition, the EPA is currently evaluating whether additional regulation of coal combustion byproducts is merited under federal solid and hazardous waste laws. The EPA is currently developing its responseexpected to this decision. Regulatory decisions that will follow from this response may have implications for both new and existing stationary sources, such as power plants.issue a proposal regarding additional regulation of coal combustion byproducts in early 2010.
New or revised laws and regulations or new interpretations of existing laws and regulations, such as those related toInternational climate change could affect unit retirementnegotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change also continue. A nonbinding agreement was announced during the most recent round of negotiations in December 2009 that included a pledge from both developed and replacement decisions and/or result in significant additional expense and operating restrictions on the facilities of the traditional operating companies or Southern Power or increased compliance costs which may not be fully recoverable from customers and would thereforedeveloping countries to reduce the net income of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, or Southern Power. their greenhouse gas emissions.
The cost impact of such legislation, regulation, or new interpretations, or international negotiations would depend upon the specific requirements enacted and cannot be determined at this time. For example, the impact of currently proposed legislation relating to greenhouse gas emissions would depend on a variety of factors, including the specific greenhouse gas emissions limits or renewable energy requirements, the timing of implementation of these

I-17


limits or requirements, the level of emissions allowances allocated and the level that must be purchased, the purchase price of emissions allowances, the development and commercial availability of technologies for renewable energy and for the reduction of emissions, the degree to which offsets may be used for compliance, provisions for cost containment (if any), the impact on coal and natural gas prices, and cost recovery through regulated rates or market-based rates for Southern Power.
Although the outcome cannot be determined at this time, legislation or regulation related to greenhouse gas emissions, renewable energy standards, air quality, coal combustion byproducts and other matters, individually or together, are likely to result in significant and additional compliance costs, including significant capital expenditures, and could result in additional operating restrictions. These costs could affect future unit retirement and replacement decisions, and could result in the retirement of a significant number of coal-fired generating units of the traditional operating companies. Additional compliance costs and costs related to potential unit retirements could affect results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered from customers. Further, higher costs that are recovered through regulated rates could contribute to reduced demand for electricity, which could negatively impact results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition.
General Risks Related to Operation of Southern Company’s Utility Subsidiaries
The regional power market in which Southern Company and its utility subsidiaries compete may have changing transmission regulatory structures, which could affect the ownership of these assets and related revenues and expenses.
The traditional operating companies currently own and operate transmission facilities as part of a vertically integrated utility. Transmission revenues are not separated from generation and distribution revenues in their approved retail rates. Current FERC efforts that may potentially change the regulatory and/or operational structure of transmission include rules related to the standardization of generation interconnection, as well as an inquiry into, among other things, market power by vertically integrated utilities.interconnection. The financial condition, net income, and cash flows of Southern Company and its utility subsidiaries could be adversely affected by future changes in the federal regulatory or operational structure of transmission.
Deregulation or restructuring in the electric industry may result in increased competition and unrecovered costs which could negatively impact theThe net income of Southern Company, and the traditional operating companies, and the value of their respective assets.
Increased competition resulting from restructuring effortsSouthern Power could have a significant adverse financial impact on Southern Company and the traditional operating companies. Any adoptionbe negatively impacted by competitive activity in the territories served by the traditional

I-16


operating companies of retail competition and the unbundling of regulated energy service could have a significant adverse financial impact on Southern Company and the traditional operating companies due to an impairment of assets, a loss of retail customers, lower profit margins, an inability to recover reasonable costs, or increased costs of capital. Southern Company and the traditional operating companies cannot predict if or when they may be subject to changes in legislation or regulation, nor can Southern Company and the traditional operating companies predict the impact of these changes.wholesale electricity markets.
Additionally, the electric utility industry has experienced a substantial increase in competitionCompetition at the wholesale level.level continues to expand and evolve in the electricity markets. As a result of changes in federal law and regulatory policy, competition in the wholesale electricity marketmarkets has greatly increased due to a greater participation by traditional electricity suppliers, non-utility generators, IPPs, wholesale power marketers, and brokers and due to the trading of energy futures contracts on various commodities exchanges. In addition,brokers. FERC rules onrelated to transmission service are designed to facilitate competition in the wholesale market on a nationwide basis by providing greater flexibility and more choices to wholesale power customers.
Changescustomers, including initiatives designed to promote and encourage the criteria used by the FERC for approvalintegration of market-based rate authority may negatively impact the traditional operating companies’renewable sources of supply. Moreover, along with transactions contemplating physical delivery of energy, futures contracts and Southern Power’s ability to charge market-based rates which could negatively impact the net income and cash flow ofderivatives are traded on various commodities exchanges. Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power.
Each ofPower cannot predict the traditional operating companies and Southern Power have authorization from the FERC to sell power to nonaffiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices. Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based sale to an affiliate.
In 2004, the FERC initiated a proceeding to assess Southern Company’s generation dominance within its retail service territory. The ability to charge market-based rates in other markets is not an issue in the proceeding. Any new market-based rate sales by any subsidiary of Southern Company in Southern Company’s retail service territory entered into during a 15-month refund period that ended in May 2006 could be subject to refund to a cost-based rate level.
In November 2007, the presiding administrative law judge issued an initial decision regarding the methodology to be used in the generation dominance tests. The proceedings are ongoing. The ultimate outcome of this generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined, but an adverse decision by the FERC in a final order could require the traditional operating companies and Southern Power to charge cost-based rates for certain wholesale sales in the Southern Company retail service territory, which may be lower than negotiated market-based rates, and could also result in total refunds of up to $19.7 million, plus interest. Southern Company and its subsidiaries believe that there is no meritorious basis for an adverse decision in this proceeding and are vigorously defending themselves in this matter.
In June 2007, the FERC issued its final rule in Order No. 697 regarding market-based rate authority. The FERC generally retained its current market-based rate standards. Responding to a number of requests for rehearing, the FERC issued Order No. 697-A on April 21, 2008 and Order No. 697-B on December 12, 2008. These orders largely affirmed the FERC’s prior revision and codification of the regulations governing market-based rates for public utilities. In accordance with the orders, Southern Company submitted to the FERC an updated market power analysis on September 2, 2008 related to its continued market-based rate authority. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
On October 17, 2008, Southern Company filed with the FERC a revised market-based rate (MBR) tariff and a new cost-based rate (CBR) tariff.   The revised MBR tariff provides for a “must offer” energy auction whereby Southern Company offers all of its available energy for sale in a day-ahead auction and an hour-ahead auction with reserve prices not to exceed the CBR tariff price, after considering Southern Company’s native load requirements, reliability obligations, and sales commitments to third parties. All sales under the energy auction would be at market clearing prices established under the auction rules. The new CBR tariff provides for a cost-based price for wholesale sales of less than a year. On December 18, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the MBR tariff subject to certain revisions to the auction proposal. On January 21, 2009, Southern Company made a compliance filing that accepted all the conditions of the MBR tariff order. When this order becomes final, Southern Company will have 30 days to implement the wholesale auction. On December 31, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting

I-17


the CBR tariff subject to providing additional information. On January 30, 2009, Southern Company filed a response addressing the FERC inquiry to the CBR tariff order. Implementation of the energy auction in accordance with the MBR tariff order is expected to adequately mitigate going forward any presumption of market power that Southern Company may have in the Southern Company retail service territory. The timing of when the FERC may issue final orders on the MBR and CBR tariffs and the ultimate outcomeimpact of these matters cannot be determined at this time.and other such developments, nor can they predict the effect of changes in levels of wholesale supply and demand, which are typically driven by factors beyond their control.
Risks Related to Southern Company and its Business
Southern Company may be unable to meet its ongoing and future financial obligations and to pay dividends on its common stock if its subsidiaries are unable to pay upstream dividends or repay funds to Southern Company.
Southern Company is a holding company and, as such, Southern Company has no operations of its own. Substantially all of Southern Company’s consolidated assets are held by subsidiaries. Southern Company’s ability to meet its financial obligations and to pay dividends on its common stock is primarily dependent on the net income and cash flows of its subsidiaries and their ability to pay upstream dividends or to repay funds to Southern Company. Prior to funding Southern Company, Southern Company’s subsidiaries have regulatory restrictions and financial obligations that must be satisfied, including among others, debt service and preferred and preference stock dividends. Southern Company’s subsidiaries are separate legal entities and have no obligation to provide Southern Company with funds for its payment obligations.

I-18


The financial performance of Southern Company and its subsidiaries may be adversely affected if they are unable to successfully operate their facilities or perform certain corporate functions.
The financial performance of Southern Company and its subsidiaries depends on the successful operation of its subsidiaries’ electric generating, transmission, and distribution facilities. Operating these facilities involves many risks, including:
  operator error or failure of equipment or processes;
 
  operating limitations that may be imposed by environmental or other regulatory requirements;
 
  labor disputes;
 
  terrorist attacks;
 
  fuel or material supply interruptions;
 
  compliance with mandatory reliability standards, including mandatory cyber security standards;
 
  information technology system failure;
cyber intrusion; and
 
  catastrophic events such as fires, earthquakes, explosions, floods, droughts, hurricanes, pandemic health events such as an avian influenza,influenzas, or other similar occurrences.
A severe drought could reduce the availability of water and restrict or prevent the operation of certain generating facilities. A decrease or elimination of revenues from the electric generation, transmission, or distribution facilities or an increase in the cost of operating the facilities would reduce the net income and cash flows and could adversely impact the financial condition of the affected traditional operating company or Southern Power and of Southern Company.
The traditional operating companies could be subject to higher costs and penalties as a result of mandatory reliability standards.
As a result of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, owners and operators of bulk power transmission systems, including the traditional operating companies, are subject to mandatory reliability standards enacted by the North American

I-18


Reliability Corporation and enforced by the FERC. Compliance with the mandatory reliability standards may subject the traditional operating companies and Southern Company to higher operating costs and may result in increased capital expenditures. If any traditional operating company is found to be in noncompliance with the mandatory reliability standards, the traditional operating company could be subject to sanctions, including substantial monetary penalties.
The revenues of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power depend in part on sales under PPAs. The failure of a counterparty to one of these PPAs to perform its obligations, or the failure to renew the PPAs, could have a negative impact on the net income and cash flows of the affected traditional operating company or Southern Power and of Southern Company.
Most of Southern Power’s generating capacity has been sold to purchasers under PPAs. In addition, the traditional operating companies enter into PPAs with non-affiliated parties. Revenues are dependent on the continued performance by the purchasers of their obligations under these PPAs. Even though Southern Power and the traditional operating companies have a rigorous credit evaluation process, the failure of one of the purchasers to perform its obligations could have a negative impact on the net income and cash flows of the affected traditional operating company or Southern Power and of Southern Company. Although these credit evaluations take into account the possibility of default by a purchaser, actual exposure to a default by a purchaser may be greater than the

I-19


credit evaluation predicts. Additionally, neither Southern Power nor any traditional operating company can predict whether the PPAs will be renewed at the end of their respective terms or on what terms any renewals may be made. If a PPA is not renewed, a replacement PPA cannot be assured.
Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power may incur additional costs or delays in the construction of new plants or other facilities and may not be able to recover their investment.investments. The facilities of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power require ongoing capital expenditures.
The businesses of the registrants require substantial capital expenditures for investments in new facilities and capital improvements to transmission, distribution, and generation facilities, including those to meet environmental standards. Certain of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power are in the process of constructing new generating facilities and adding environmental controls equipment at existing generating facilities. Southern Company intends to continue its strategy of developing and constructing other new facilities, including proposed new nuclear generating units, and acombined cycle units, including the proposed integrated coal gasification combined cycle facility, and the proposed biomass generating units, expanding existing facilities, and adding environmental control equipment. These types of projects are long-term in nature and may involve facility designs that have not been finalized or previously constructed. The completion of these types of projects without delays or significant cost overruns is subject to substantial risks, including:
  shortages and inconsistent quality of equipment, materials, and labor;
 
  work stoppages;
 
  contractor or supplier non-performance under construction or other agreements;
 
  delays in or failure to receive necessary permits, approvals, and other regulatory authorizations;
 
  impacts of new and existing laws and regulations, including environmental laws and regulations;
 
  continued public and policymaker support for such projects;
adverse weather conditions;
 
  unforeseen engineering problems;
 
  changes in project design or scope;
 
  environmental and geological conditions;

I-19


  delays or increased costs to interconnect facilities to transmission grids;
 
  unanticipated cost increases, including materials and labor; and
 
  attention to other projects.
In addition, with respect to the construction of new nuclear units, a major incident at a nuclear facility anywhere in the world could cause the NRC to delay or prohibit construction of new nuclear units. If a traditional operating company or Southern Power is unable to complete the development or construction of a facility or decides to delay or cancel construction of a facility, it may not be able to recover its investment in that facility and may incur substantial cancellation payments under equipment purchase orders or construction contracts. Even if a construction project is completed, the total costs may be higher than estimated and there is no assurance that the traditional operating company will be able to recover such expenditures through regulated rates. In addition, construction delays and contractor performance shortfalls can result in the loss of revenues and may, in turn, adversely affect the net income and financial position of a traditional operating company or Southern Power and of Southern Company.

I-20


Furthermore, if construction projects are not completed according to specification, a traditional operating company or Southern Power and Southern Company may incur liabilities and suffer reduced plant efficiency, higher operating costs, and reduced net income.
Once facilities come into commercial operation, ongoing capital expenditures are required to maintain reliable levels of operation. Significant portions of the traditional operating companies’ existing facilities were constructed many years ago. Older generation equipment, even if maintained in accordance with good engineering practices, may require significant capital expenditures to maintain efficiency, to comply with changing environmental requirements, or to provide reliable operations.
Changes in technology may make Southern Company’s electric generating facilities owned by the traditional operating companies and Southern Power less competitive.
A key element of the business model of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power is that generating power at central station power plants achieves economies of scale and produces power at a competitive cost. There are distributed generation technologies that produce power, including fuel cells, microturbines, wind turbines, and solar cells. It is possible that advances in technology will reduce the cost of alternative methods of producing power to a level that is competitive with that of most central station power electric production. If this were to happen and if these technologies achieved economies of scale, the market share of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power could be eroded, and the value of their respective electric generating facilities could be reduced. It is also possible that rapid advances in central station power generation technology could reduce the value of the current electric generating facilities owned by Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power. Changes in technology could also alter the channels through which electric customers buy or utilize power, which could reduce the revenues or increase the expenses of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, or Southern Power.
Operation of nuclear facilities involves inherent risks, including environmental, health, regulatory, terrorism, and financial risks, that could result in fines or the closure of Southern Company’s nuclear units owned by Alabama Power or Georgia Power and which may present potential exposures in excess of insurance coverage.
Alabama Power owns, and contracts for the operation of, two nuclear units and Georgia Power holds undivided interests in, and contracts for the operation of, four existing nuclear units. Theseunits and the construction of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4. The six existing units are operated by Southern Nuclear and represent approximately 3,680 megawatts, or 8.6%, of Southern Company’s generation capacity as of December 31, 2008. These nuclear2009. Nuclear facilities are subject to environmental, health, and financial risks such as on-site storage of spent nuclear fuel, the ability to dispose of such spent nuclear fuel, the ability to maintain adequate reserves for decommissioning, potential liabilities arising out of the operation of these facilities, and the threat of a possible terrorist attack. Alabama Power and Georgia Power maintain decommissioning trusts and external insurance coverage to minimize the financial exposure to these risks; however, it is possible that damages could exceed the amount of insurance coverage.
The NRC has broad authority under federal law to impose licensing and safety-related requirements for the operation of nuclear generation facilities. In the event of non-compliance, the NRC has the authority to impose fines

I-20


or shut down any unit, depending upon its assessment of the severity of the situation, until compliance is achieved. NRC orders or regulations related to increased security measures and any future safety requirements promulgated by the NRC could require Alabama Power and Georgia Power to make substantial operating and capital expenditures at their nuclear plants. In addition, although Alabama Power, Georgia Power, and Southern Company have no reason to anticipate a serious nuclear incident at their plants, if an incident did occur, it could result in substantial costs to Alabama Power or Georgia Power and Southern Company. A major incident at a nuclear facility anywhere in the world could cause the NRC to limit or prohibit the operation or licensing of any domestic nuclear unit.
In addition, potential terrorist threats and increased public scrutiny of utilities could result in increased nuclear licensing or compliance costs that are difficult or impossible to predict.
The generation operations and energy marketing operations of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power are subject to risks, many of which are beyond their control, including

I-21


changes in power prices and fuel costs, that may reduce Southern Company’s, the traditional operating companies’, and Southern Power’s revenues and increase costs.
The generation operations and energy marketing operations of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power are subject to changes in power prices or fuel costs, which could increase the cost of producing power or decrease the amount Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power receive from the sale of power. The market prices for these commodities may fluctuate significantly over relatively short periods of time. Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power attempt to mitigate risks associated with fluctuating fuel costs by passing these costs on to customers through the traditional operating companies’ fuel cost recovery clauses or through PPAs. Among the factors that could influence power prices and fuel costs are:
  prevailing market prices for coal, natural gas, uranium, fuel oil, and other fuels used in the generation facilities of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power including associated transportation costs, and supplies of such commodities;
 
  demand for energy and the extent of additional supplies of energy available from current or new competitors;
 
  liquidity in the general wholesale electricity market;
 
  weather conditions impacting demand for electricity;
 
  seasonality;
 
  transmission or transportation constraints or inefficiencies;
 
  availability of competitively priced alternative energy sources;
 
  forced or unscheduled plant outages for the Southern Company system, its competitors, or third party providers;
 
  the financial condition of market participants;
 
  the economy in the service territory, the nation, and worldwide, including the impact of economic conditions on industrial and commercial demand for electricity and the worldwide demand for fuels;
 
  natural disasters, wars, embargos, acts of terrorism, and other catastrophic events; and
 
  federal, state, and foreign energy and environmental regulation and legislation.
Certain of these factors could increase the expenses of the traditional operating companies or Southern Power and

I-21


Southern Company. For the traditional operating companies, such increases may not be fully recoverable through rates. Other of these factors could reduce the revenues of the traditional operating companies or Southern Power and Southern Company.
TheHistorically, the traditional operating companies from time to time have experienced underrecovered fuel cost balances and deficits in their storm cost recovery reserve balances and may continue to experience such balances in the future. While the traditional operating companies are generally authorized to recover underrecovered fuel costs through fuel cost recovery clauses and storm recovery costs through special rate provisions administered by the respective PSCs, recovery may be denied if costs are deemed to be imprudently incurred and delays in the authorization of such recovery could negatively impact the cash flows of the affected traditional operating company and Southern Company.

I-22


A downgrade in the credit ratings of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, or Southern Power could negatively affect their ability to access capital at reasonable costs and/or could require Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, or Southern Power to post collateral or replace certain indebtedness.
There are a number of factors that rating agencies evaluate to arrive at credit ratings for Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power, including capital structure, regulatory environment, the ability to cover liquidity requirements, and other commitments for capital. Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power could experience a downgrade in their ratings if any of the rating agencies conclude that the level of business or financial risk of the industry or Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, or Southern Power has deteriorated. Changes in ratings methodologies by the agencies could also have a negative impact on credit ratings. If one or more rating agencies downgrade Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, or Southern Power, borrowing costs would increase, its pool of investors and funding sources would likely decrease, and, particularly for any downgrade to below investment grade, collateral requirements may be triggered in a number of contracts.
The use of derivative contracts by Southern Company and its subsidiaries in the normal course of business could result in financial losses that negatively impact the net income of Southern Company and its subsidiaries.
Southern Company and its subsidiaries, including the traditional operating companies and Southern Power, use derivative instruments, such as swaps, options, futures, and forwards, to manage their commodity and interest rate risksexposures and, to a lesser extent, engage in limited trading activities. Southern Company and its subsidiaries could recognize financial losses as a result of volatility in the market values of these contracts or if a counterparty fails to perform. These risks are managed through risk management policies, limits, and procedures. These risk management policies, limits, and procedures might not work as planned and cannot entirely eliminate the risks associated with these activities. In addition, derivative contracts entered for hedging purposes might not off-set the underlying exposure being hedged as expected resulting in financial losses. In the absence of actively quoted market prices and pricing information from external sources, the valuation of these financial instruments can involve management’s judgment or use of estimates. The factors used in the valuation of these instruments become more difficult to predict and the calculations become less reliable the further into the future these estimates are made. As a result, changes in the underlying assumptions or use of alternative valuation methods could affect the value of the reported fair value of these contracts.
The traditional operating companies and Southern Power may not be able to obtain adequate fuel supplies, which could limit their ability to operate their facilities.
The traditional operating companies and Southern Power purchase fuel, including coal, natural gas, uranium, and fuel oil, from a number of suppliers. Disruption in the delivery of fuel, including disruptions as a result of, among other things, transportation delays, weather, labor relations, force majeure events, or environmental regulations affecting any of these fuel suppliers, could limit the ability of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power to operate their respective facilities, and thus reduce the net income of the affected traditional operating company or Southern Power and Southern Company.
The traditional operating companies are dependent on coal for much of their electric generating capacity. Each traditional operating company has coal supply contracts in place; however, there can be no assurance that the counterparties to these agreements will fulfill their obligations to supply coal to the traditional operating companies. The suppliers under these agreements may experience financial or technical problems which inhibit their ability to fulfill their obligations to the traditional operating companies. In addition, the suppliers under these agreements may not be required to supply coal to the traditional operating companies under certain circumstances, such as in the event of a natural disaster. If the traditional operating companies are unable to obtain their coal requirements under these contracts, the traditional operating companies may be required to purchase their coal requirements at higher prices, which may not be fully recoverable through rates.
In addition, Southern Power in particular, and the traditional operating companies to a lesser extent, are dependent on natural gas for a portion of their electric generating capacity. Natural gas supplies can be subject to disruption in

I-23


the event production or distribution is curtailed, such as in the event of a hurricane.
In addition, world market conditions for fuels can impact the availability of natural gas, coal, and uranium.
Demand for power could exceed supply capacity, resulting in increased costs for purchasing capacity in the open market or building additional generation capabilities.
Through the traditional operating companies and Southern Power, Southern Company is currently obligated to supply power to retail customers and wholesale customers under long-term PPAs. At peak times, the demand for power required to meet this obligation could exceed Southern Company’s available generation capacity. Market or

I-22


competitive forces may require that the traditional operating companies or Southern Power purchase capacity on the open market or build additional generation capabilities. Because regulators may not permit the traditional operating companies to pass all of these purchase or construction costs on to their customers, the traditional operating companies may not be able to recover any of these costs or may have exposure to regulatory lag associated with the time between the incurrence of costs of purchased or constructed capacity and the traditional operating companies’ recovery in customers’ rates. Under Southern Power’s long-term fixed price PPAs, Southern Power would not have the ability to recover any of these costs. These situations could have negative impacts on net income and cash flows for the affected traditional operating company or Southern Power and Southern Company.
Demand for power could decrease or fail to grow at expected rates, resulting in stagnant or reduced revenues, limited growth opportunities, and potentially stranded generation assets.
Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power collectivelyeach engage in a long-term planning process to determine the optimal mix and timing of new generation assets required to serve future load obligations. This planning process must look many years into the future in order to accommodate the long lead times associated with the permitting and construction of new generation facilities. Inherent risk exists in predicting demand this far into the future as these future loads are dependent on many uncertain factors, including regional economic conditions, customer usage patterns, efficiency programs, and customer technology adoption. Because regulators may not permit the traditional operating companies to adjust rates to recover the costs of new generation assets while such assets are being constructed, the traditional operating companies may not be able to fully recover these costs or may have exposure to regulatory lag associated with the time between the incurrence of costs of additional capacity and the traditional operating companies’ recovery in customers’ rates. Under Southern Power’s model of selling capacity and energy at negotiated market-based rates under long-term PPAs, Southern Power might not be able to fully execute its business plan if market prices drop below original forecasts. Southern Power may not be able to extend its existing PPAs or to find new buyers for existing generation assets as existing PPAs expire, or it may be forced to market these assets at prices lower than originally intended. These situations could have negative impacts on net income and cash flows for the affected traditional operating company or Southern Power and Southern Company.
The operating results of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power are affected by weather conditions and may fluctuate on a seasonal and quarterly basis. In addition, significant weather events, such as hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and droughts, or a terrorist attack could result in substantial damage to or limit the operation of the properties of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power and could negatively impact results of operation, financial condition, and liquidity.
Electric power supply is generally a seasonal business. In many parts of the country, demand for power peaks during the summer months, with market prices also peaking at that time. In other areas, power demand peaks during the winter. As a result, the overall operating results of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power in the future may fluctuate substantially on a seasonal basis. In addition, Southern Company, the traditional operating companies and Southern Power have historically sold less power when weather conditions are milder. Unusually mild weather in the future could reduce the revenues, net income, available cash, and borrowing ability of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power.
Mirant and The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Mirant Corporation have filedIn addition, volatile or significant weather events or a claim against Southern Company seekingterrorist attack could result in substantial monetary damages in connection with transfers made by Mirant to Southern Company priordamage to the Mirant spin-off. An adverse outcome of this litigation could negatively impact the net incometransmission and cash flows of Southern Company.
Mirant was an energy company with businesses that included independent power projects and energy trading and risk management companies in the U.S. and selected other countries. It was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Southern Company until its initial public offering in October 2000. In April 2001, Southern Company completed a spin-off to its shareholders of its remaining ownership, and Mirant became an independent corporate entity.
In July 2003, Mirant and certain of its affiliates filed for voluntary reorganization under Chapter 11distribution lines of the Bankruptcy Code. In January 2006, Mirant’s plantraditional operating companies and the generating facilities of reorganization became effective, and Mirant emerged from bankruptcy. As part of the plan, Mirant transferred substantially all of its assets and its restructured debt to a new corporation that adopted the name Mirant Corporation (Reorganized Mirant).

I-23


In December 2004, as a result of concluding an IRS audit for the tax years 2000 and 2001, Southern Company paid approximately $39 million in additional tax and interest related to Mirant tax items and filed a claim in Mirant’s bankruptcy case for that amount. Through December 2008, Southern Company received from the IRS approximately $38 million in refunds related to Mirant. Southern Company believes it has a right to recoup the $39 million tax payment owed by Mirant from such tax refunds. As a result, Southern Company intends to retain the tax refunds and reduce its claim against Mirant for the payment of Mirant taxes by the amount of such refunds.  MC Asset Recovery, a special purpose subsidiary of Reorganized Mirant, has objected to and sought to equitably subordinate the Southern Company tax claim in its fraudulent transfer litigation against Southern Company.  Southern Company has reserved the remaining amount with respect to its Mirant tax claim.
If Southern Company is ultimately required to make any additional payments either with respect to the IRS audit or its contingent obligations under guarantees of Mirant subsidiaries, Mirant’s indemnification obligation to Southern Company for these additional payments, if allowed, would constitute unsecured claims against Mirant, entitled to stock in Reorganized Mirant. The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
In June 2005, Mirant, as a debtor in possession, and The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Mirant Corporation filed a complaint against Southern Company in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas, which was amended in July 2005, February 2006, May 2006, and March 2007. In January 2006, MC Asset Recovery was substituted as plaintiff. The fourth amended complaint (the complaint) alleges that Southern Company caused Mirant to engage in certain fraudulent transfers and to pay illegal dividends to Southern Company prior to the spin-off. The complaint also seeks to recharacterize certain advances from Southern Company to Mirant for investments in energy facilities from debt to equity. The complaint further alleges that Southern Company is liable to Mirant’s creditors for the full amount of Mirant’s liability under an alter ego theory of recovery and that Southern Company breached its fiduciary duties to Mirant and its creditors, caused Mirant to breach its fiduciary duties to creditors, and aided and abetted breaches of fiduciary duties by Mirant’s directors and officers. The complaint also seeks recoveries under the theories of restitution and unjust enrichment. In addition, the complaint alleged a claim under the Federal Debt Collection Procedure Act (FDCPA) to avoid certain transfers from Mirant to Southern Company; however, on July 7, 2008, the court ruled that the FDCPA does not apply and that Georgia law should apply instead. The complaint seeks monetary damages in excess of $2 billion plus interest, punitive damages, attorneys�� fees, and costs. Finally, the complaint includes an objection to Southern Company’s pending claims against Mirant in the Bankruptcy Court (which relate to reimbursement under the separation agreements of payments such as income taxes, interest, legal fees, and other guarantees described in Note 7 to the financial statements of Southern Company in Item 8 herein) and seeks equitable subordination of Southern Company’s claims to the claims of all other creditors. Southern Company served an answer to the complaint in April 2007.
In February 2006, the Company’s motion to transfer the case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia was granted. In May 2006, Southern Company filed a motion for summary judgment seeking entry of judgment against the plaintiff as to all counts in the complaint. In December 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia granted in part and denied in part the motion. As a result, certain breach of fiduciary duty claims alleged in earlier versions of the complaint were barred; all other claims were allowed to proceed. On August 6, 2008, Southern Company filed a second motion for summary judgment. MC Asset Recovery filed its response to Southern Company’s motion for summary judgment on October 20, 2008. On February 5, 2009, the court denied Southern Company’s summary judgment motion in connection with the fraudulent conveyance and illegal dividend claims concerning certain advance return/loan repayments in 1999, dividends in 1999 and 2000, and transfers in connection with Mirant’s separation from Southern Company. The court granted the motion with respect to certain claims, including claims for restitution and unjust enrichment, claims that Southern Company aided and abetted Mirant’s directors’ breach of fiduciary duties to Mirant, and claims that Southern Company used Mirant as an alter ego. In addition, the court granted Southern Company’s motion in connection with the fraudulent transfer and illegal dividend claims concerning certain turbine termination payments. Southern Company believes there is no meritorious basis for the claims in the complaint and is vigorously defending itself in this action. See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company under “Mirant Matters – MC Asset Recovery Litigation” in Item 8 herein. The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot now be determined at this time.

I-24


traditional operating companies and Southern Power. The traditional operating companies and Southern Power have significant investments in the Atlantic and Gulf Coast regions which could be subject to major storm activity. Further, severe drought conditions can reduce the availability of water and restrict or prevent the operation of certain generating facilities.
Each traditional operating company maintains a reserve for property damage to cover the cost of damages from weather events to its transmission and distribution lines and the cost of uninsured damages to its generating facilities and other property. In the event a traditional operating company experiences any of these weather events or any natural disaster, or other catastrophic event, such as a terrorist attack, recovery of costs in excess of reserves and insurance coverage is subject to the approval of its state PSC. While the traditional operating companies generally are entitled to recover prudently incurred costs incurred in connection with such an event, any denial by the applicable state PSC or delay in recovery of any portion of such costs could have a material negative impact on a traditional operating company’s and Southern Company’s results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.
In addition, damages resulting from significant weather events within the service territory of any traditional operating company or affecting Southern Power’s customers may result in the loss of customers and reduced demand for electricity. For example, Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast of Mississippi in August 2005 and caused substantial damage within Mississippi Power’s service territory. As of December 31, 2009, Mississippi Power had approximately 4.6% fewer retail customers as compared to pre-storm levels. Any significant loss of customers or reduction in demand for electricity could have a material negative impact on a traditional operating company’s, Southern Power’s, and Southern Company’s results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.
Failure to attract and retain an appropriately qualified workforce could negatively impact Southern Company’s and its subsidiaries’ results of operations.
Events such as an aging workforce without appropriate replacements, mismatch of skillset to future needs, or unavailability of contract resources may lead to operating challenges or increased costs. Such operating challenges include lack of resources, loss of knowledge, and a lengthy time period associated with skill development, especially with the workforce needs associated with new nuclear construction. Failure to hire and adequately obtain replacement employees, including the ability to transfer significant internal historical knowledge and expertise to the new employees, or the future availability and cost of contract labor may adversely affect Southern Company and its subsidiaries’ ability to manage and operate their businesses. If Southern Company and its subsidiaries, including the traditional operating companies, are unable to successfully attract and retain an appropriately qualified workforce, results of operations could be negatively impacted.
Risks Related to Market and Economic Volatility
The business of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power is dependent on their ability to successfully access funds through capital markets and financial institutions. The inability of Southern Company, any traditional operating company, or Southern Power to access funds may limit its ability to execute its business plan by impacting its ability to fund capital investments or acquisitions that Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, or Southern Power may otherwise rely on to achieve future earnings and cash flows.
Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power rely on access to both short-term money markets and longer-term capital markets as a significant source of liquidity for capital requirements not satisfied by the cash flow from their respective operations. If Southern Company, any traditional operating company, or Southern Power is not able to access capital at competitive rates, its ability to implement its business plan will be limited by impacting its ability to fund capital investments or acquisitions that Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, or Southern Power may otherwise rely on to achieve future earnings and cash flows. In addition, Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power rely on committed bank lending agreements as back-up liquidity which allows them to access low cost money markets. Each of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power believes that it will maintain sufficient access to these financial markets based upon current credit ratings. However, certain market disruptions or a downgrade of the credit rating of Southern Company, any traditional operating company, or Southern Power may increase its cost of borrowing or adversely affect its ability to raise capital through the issuance of securities or other borrowing arrangements or its ability to secure committed bank lending agreements used as back-up sources of

I-25


capital. Such disruptions could include:
  an economic downturn or uncertainty;
 
  the bankruptcy of an unrelated energy company or financial institution;
 
  capital markets volatility and interruption;
 
  financial institution distress;
 
  market prices for electricity and gas;
 
  terrorist attacks or threatened attacks on Southern Company’s facilities or unrelated energy companies’ facilities;
 
  war or threat of war; or
 
  the overall health of the utility and financial institution industries.
Market performance and other changes may decrease the value of benefit plans and decommissioning trust assets or may increase medical costs, which then could require significant additional funding.
The performance of the capital markets affects the values of the assets held in trust under Southern Company’s pension and postretirement benefit plans and the assets held in trust to satisfy obligations to decommission Alabama Power’s and Georgia Power’s nuclear plants. Southern Company, Alabama Power, and Georgia Power have significant obligations in these areas and hold significant assets in these trusts. These assets are subject to market fluctuations and will yield uncertain returns, which may fall below projected return rates. A decline in the market value of these assets, as has been experienced in prior periods, may increase the funding requirements relating to Southern Company’s benefit plan liabilities and Alabama Power’s and Georgia Power’s decommissioning obligations. Additionally, changes in interest rates affect the liabilities under Southern Company’s pension and postretirement benefit plans; as interest rates decrease, the liabilities increase, potentially requiring additional funding. Further, changes in demographics, including increased numbers of retirements or changes in life expectancy assumptions, may also increase the funding requirements of the obligations related to the pension benefit plans. Southern Company and its subsidiaries are also facing rising medical benefit costs, including the current costs for active and retired employees. It is possible that these costs may increase at a rate that is significantly higher than anticipated. If Southern Company is unable to successfully manage benefit plan assets and medical benefit costs and Alabama Power and Georgia

I-25


Power are unable to successfully manage the decommissioning trust funds, results of operations and financial position could be negatively affected. Additionally, Southern Company and its subsidiaries may also be affected by the potential passage of healthcare legislation.
Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power are subject to risks associated with a changing economic environment, which could impact their ability to obtain adequate insurance and the financial stability of the customers of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power.
The financial condition of some insurance companies, the threat of terrorism, and the hurricanes that affected the Gulf Coast, among other things, have had disruptive effects on the insurance industry. The availability of insurance covering risks that Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, Southern Power, and their respective competitors typically insure against may decrease, and the insurance that Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power are able to obtain may have higher deductibles, higher premiums, and more restrictive policy terms.
Additionally, anySouthern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power are exposed to risks related to general economic conditions in their applicable service territory and are thus impacted by the economic cycles of the customers each serves. Any economic downturn or disruption of financial markets could negatively affect the financial stability of the customers and counterparties of the traditional operating companies and Southern

I-26


Power. As territories served by the traditional operating companies and Southern Power experience economic downturns, energy consumption patterns may change and revenues may be negatively impacted. Additionally, customers could voluntarily reduce their consumption of electricity in response to decreases in their disposable income or individual conservation efforts. If commercial and industrial customers experience economic downturns, their consumption of electricity may decline. As a result, revenues may be negatively impacted.
Further, the results of operations of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power are affected by customer growth in their applicable service territory. Customer growth and customer usage can be affected by economic factors in the service territory of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power and elsewhere, including, for example, job and income growth, housing starts, and new home prices. A population decline and/or business closings in the territory served by the traditional operating companies or Southern Power or slower than anticipated customer growth as a result of the current recession or otherwise could also have a negative impact on revenues and could result in greater expense for uncollectible customer balances.
As with other parts of the country, the territories served by the traditional operating companies and Southern Power have been impacted by the current economic recession. The traditional operating companies have experienced some decline in the rate of residential and commercial sales growth, and also have experienced declining sales to commercial and industrial customers due to the economic recession. Southern Power is expected to experience reduced future revenues for its requirements customers due to the economic recession. The timing and extent of the recovery cannot be predicted.
These and the other factors discussed above could adversely affect Southern Company’s, subsidiaries’ ability to maintain energy sales, thereby decreasingthe traditional operating companies’, and Southern Company’sPower’s level of future net income.
CertainEnergy conservation and energy price increases could negatively impact financial results.
A number of regulatory and legislative bodies have proposed or introduced requirements and/or incentives to reduce energy consumption by certain dates. Conservation programs could impact the financial results of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power in different ways. To the extent conservation results in reduced energy demand or significantly slows the growth in demand, the value of wholesale generation assets of the traditional operating companies have substantial investments in the Atlantic or Gulf Coast regions which canand Southern Power and other unregulated business activities could be subject to major storm activity. The ability ofadversely impacted. In addition, conservation could negatively impact the traditional operating companies to recover costs and replenish reserves independing on the eventregulatory treatment of a major storm, other natural disaster, terrorist attack, or other catastrophic event generally will require regulatory action.
Eachthe associated impacts. If any traditional operating company maintainsis required to invest in conservation measures that result in reduced sales from effective conservation, regulatory lag in adjusting rates for the impact of these measures could have a reserve for property damage to cover the cost of damages from major storms to its transmission and distribution lines and the cost of uninsured damages to its generating facilities and other property. In the event anegative financial impact on such traditional operating company experiences a natural disaster, terrorist attack, or other catastrophic event, recovery of costs in excess of reserves and insurance coverage is subject to the approval of its state PSC. WhileSouthern Company. Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, generally are entitled to recover prudently incurred costs incurredand Southern Power could also be impacted if any future energy price increases result in connection with such an event, any denial bya decrease in customer usage. Southern Company, the applicable state PSC or delay in recovery of any portion of such costs could have a material negative impact on a traditional operating company’scompanies, and Southern Company’sPower are unable to determine what impact, if any, conservation and increases in energy prices will have on financial condition or results of operations and/or cash flows.operations.
Item 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS.
None.

I-26I-27


Item 2. PROPERTIES
Electric Properties – The Electric Utilities
The traditional operating companies, Southern Power, and SEGCO, at December 31, 2008,2009, owned and/or operated 34 hydroelectric generating stations, 34 fossil fuel generating stations, three nuclear generating stations, and 12 combined cycle/cogeneration stations. The amounts of capacity for each company are shown in the table below.
           
 Nameplate Nameplate
Generating Station Location Capacity (1) Location Capacity (1)
 (Kilowatts) (Kilowatts) 
FOSSIL STEAM
      
Gadsden Gadsden, AL 120,000  Gadsden, AL 120,000 
Gorgas Jasper, AL 1,221,250  Jasper, AL 1,221,250 
Barry Mobile, AL 1,525,000  Mobile, AL 1,525,000 
Greene County Demopolis, AL  300,000(2) Demopolis, AL  300,000(2)
Gaston Unit 5 Wilsonville, AL 880,000  Wilsonville, AL 880,000 
Miller Birmingham, AL  2,532,288(3) Birmingham, AL  2,532,288(3)
          
Alabama Power Total
   6,578,538    6,578,538 
          
      
Bowen Cartersville, GA 3,160,000  Cartersville, GA 3,160,000 
Branch Milledgeville, GA 1,539,700  Milledgeville, GA 1,539,700 
Hammond Rome, GA 800,000  Rome, GA 800,000 
Kraft Port Wentworth, GA 281,136  Port Wentworth, GA 281,136 
McDonough Atlanta, GA 490,000 
McDonough (4) Atlanta, GA 490,000 
McIntosh Effingham County, GA 163,117  Effingham County, GA 163,117 
McManus Brunswick, GA 115,000  Brunswick, GA 115,000 
Mitchell Albany, GA 125,000  Albany, GA 125,000 
Scherer Macon, GA  750,924(4) Macon, GA  750,924(5)
Wansley Carrollton, GA  925,550(5) Carrollton, GA  925,550(6)
Yates Newnan, GA 1,250,000  Newnan, GA 1,250,000 
          
Georgia Power Total
   9,600,427    9,600,427 
          
      
Crist Pensacola, FL 970,000  Pensacola, FL 970,000 
Daniel Pascagoula, MS  500,000(6) Pascagoula, MS  500,000(7)
Lansing Smith Panama City, FL 305,000  Panama City, FL 305,000 
Scholz Chattahoochee, FL 80,000  Chattahoochee, FL 80,000 
Scherer Unit 3 Macon, GA  204,500(4) Macon, GA  204,500(5)
          
Gulf Power Total
   2,059,500    2,059,500 
          
   
Daniel Pascagoula, MS  500,000(6) Pascagoula, MS  500,000(7)
Eaton Hattiesburg, MS 67,500  Hattiesburg, MS 67,500 
Greene County Demopolis, AL  200,000(2) Demopolis, AL  200,000(2)
Sweatt Meridian, MS 80,000  Meridian, MS 80,000 
Watson Gulfport, MS 1,012,000  Gulfport, MS 1,012,000 
          
Mississippi Power Total
   1,859,500    1,859,500 
          
      
Gaston Units 1-4 Wilsonville, AL  Wilsonville, AL 
SEGCO Total
    1,000,000(7)    1,000,000(8)
          
Total Fossil Steam
   21,097,965    21,097,965 
          
      
NUCLEAR STEAM
      
Farley Dothan, AL  Dothan, AL 
Alabama Power Total
   1,720,000    1,720,000 
          
   
Hatch Baxley, GA  899,612(8) Baxley, GA  899,612(9)
Vogtle Augusta, GA  1,060,240(9) Augusta, GA  1,060,240(10)
          
Georgia Power Total
   1,959,852    1,959,852 
          
Total Nuclear Steam
   3,679,852    3,679,852 
          
      
COMBUSTION TURBINES
      
Greene County Demopolis, AL  Demopolis, AL 
Alabama Power Total
   720,000    720,000 
          
   
Boulevard Savannah, GA 59,100  Savannah, GA 59,100 
Bowen Cartersville, GA 39,400  Cartersville, GA 39,400 
Intercession City Intercession City, FL  47,667(10) Intercession City, FL  47,667(11)
Kraft Port Wentworth, GA 22,000  Port Wentworth, GA 22,000 
McDonough Atlanta, GA 78,800  Atlanta, GA 78,800 
McIntosh Units 1 through 8 Effingham County, GA 640,000  Effingham County, GA 640,000 
McManus Brunswick, GA 481,700  Brunswick, GA 481,700 
Mitchell Albany, GA 118,200  Albany, GA 118,200 
Robins Warner Robins, GA 158,400  Warner Robins, GA 158,400 
Wansley Carrollton, GA 26,322  Carrollton, GA 26,322 
Wilson Augusta, GA 354,100  Augusta, GA 354,100 
          
Georgia Power Total
   2,025,689    2,025,689 
          
      
Lansing Smith Unit A Panama City, FL 39,400  Panama City, FL 39,400 
Pea Ridge Units 1-3 Pea Ridge, FL 15,000  Pea Ridge, FL 15,000 
          
Gulf Power Total
   54,400    54,400 
          
      
Chevron Cogenerating Station Pascagoula, MS  147,292(11) Pascagoula, MS  147,292(12)
Sweatt Meridian, MS 39,400  Meridian, MS 39,400 

I-27I-28


           
 Nameplate Nameplate
Generating Station Location Capacity (1) Location Capacity (1)
 (Kilowatts) (Kilowatts) 
Watson Gulfport, MS 39,360  Gulfport, MS 39,360 
          
Mississippi Power Total
   226,052    226,052 
          
      
Dahlberg Jackson County, GA 756,000  Jackson County, GA 756,000 
DeSoto Arcadia, FL 343,760 
Oleander Cocoa, FL 791,301  Cocoa, FL 791,301 
Rowan Salisbury, NC 455,250  Salisbury, NC 455,250 
West Georgia Thomaston, GA 668,800 
          
Southern Power Total
   2,346,311    2,671,351 
          
      
Gaston(SEGCO)
 Wilsonville, AL  19,680(7) Wilsonville, AL  19,680(8)
          
Total Combustion Turbines
   5,392,132    5,717,172 
          
      
COGENERATION
      
Washington County Washington County, AL 123,428  Washington County, AL 123,428 
GE Plastics Project Burkeville, AL 104,800  Burkeville, AL 104,800 
Theodore Theodore, AL 236,418  Theodore, AL 236,418 
          
Total Cogeneration
   464,646    464,646 
          
      
COMBINED CYCLE
      
Barry Mobile, AL  Mobile, AL 
Alabama Power Total
   1,070,424    1,070,424 
          
McIntosh Units 10&11 Effingham County, GA  Effingham County, GA 
Georgia Power Total
   1,318,920    1,318,920 
          
Smith Lynn Haven, FL  Lynn Haven, FL 
Gulf Power Total
   545,500    545,500 
          
Daniel (Leased) Pascagoula, MS  Pascagoula, MS 
Mississippi Power Total
   1,070,424    1,070,424 
          
Franklin Smiths, AL 1,857,820  Smiths, AL 1,857,820 
Harris Autaugaville, AL 1,318,920  Autaugaville, AL 1,318,920 
Rowan Salisbury, NC 530,550  Salisbury, NC 530,550 
Stanton Unit A Orlando, FL  428,649(12) Orlando, FL  428,649(13)
Wansley Carrollton, GA 1,073,000  Carrollton, GA 1,073,000 
          
Southern Power Total
   5,208,939    5,208,939 
          
Total Combined Cycle
   9,214,207    9,214,207 
          
      
HYDROELECTRIC FACILITIES
      
Bankhead Holt, AL 53,985  Holt, AL 53,985 
Bouldin Wetumpka, AL 225,000  Wetumpka, AL 225,000 
Harris Wedowee, AL 132,000  Wedowee, AL 132,000 
Henry Ohatchee, AL 72,900  Ohatchee, AL 72,900 
Holt Holt, AL 46,944  Holt, AL 46,944 
Jordan Wetumpka, AL 100,000  Wetumpka, AL 100,000 
Lay Clanton, AL 177,000  Clanton, AL 177,000 
Lewis Smith Jasper, AL 157,500  Jasper, AL 157,500 
Logan Martin Vincent, AL 135,000  Vincent, AL 135,000 
Martin Dadeville, AL 182,000  Dadeville, AL 182,000 
Mitchell Verbena, AL 170,000  Verbena, AL 170,000 
Thurlow Tallassee, AL 81,000  Tallassee, AL 81,000 
Weiss Leesburg, AL 87,750  Leesburg, AL 87,750 
Yates Tallassee, AL 47,000  Tallassee, AL 47,000 
          
Alabama Power Total
   1,668,079    1,668,079 
          
      
Barnett Shoals (Leased) Athens, GA 2,800  Athens, GA 2,800 
Bartletts Ferry Columbus, GA 173,000  Columbus, GA 173,000 
Goat Rock Columbus, GA 38,600  Columbus, GA 38,600 
Lloyd Shoals Jackson, GA 14,400  Jackson, GA 14,400 
Morgan Falls Atlanta, GA 16,800  Atlanta, GA 16,800 
North Highlands Columbus, GA 29,600  Columbus, GA 29,600 
Oliver Dam Columbus, GA 60,000  Columbus, GA 60,000 
Rocky Mountain Rome, GA  215,256(13) Rome, GA  215,256(14)
Sinclair Dam Milledgeville, GA 45,000  Milledgeville, GA 45,000 
Tallulah Falls Clayton, GA 72,000  Clayton, GA 72,000 
Terrora Clayton, GA 16,000  Clayton, GA 16,000 
Tugalo Clayton, GA 45,000  Clayton, GA 45,000 
Wallace Dam Eatonton, GA 321,300  Eatonton, GA 321,300 
Yonah Toccoa, GA 22,500  Toccoa, GA 22,500 
6 Other Plants   18,080    18,080 
          
Georgia Power Total
   1,090,336    1,090,336 
          
Total Hydroelectric Facilities
   2,758,415    2,758,415 
          
      
Total Generating Capacity
   42,607,217    42,932,257 
          
 
Notes:
 
(1) See “Jointly-Owned Facilities” herein for additional information.
 
(2) Owned by Alabama Power and Mississippi Power as tenants in common in the proportions of 60% and 40%, respectively.
 
(3) Capacity shown is Alabama Power’s portion (91.84%) of total plant capacity.
 
(4) McDonough Units 1 and 2 are scheduled to be retired in October 2011 and October 2010, respectively.
(5)Capacity shown for Georgia Power is 8.4% of Units 1 and 2 and 75% of Unit 3. Capacity shown for Gulf Power is 25% of Unit 3.

I-28I-29


(5)(6) Capacity shown is Georgia Power’s portion (53.5%) of total plant capacity.
 
(6)(7) Represents 50% of the plant which is owned as tenants in common by Gulf Power and Mississippi Power.
 
(7)(8) SEGCO is jointly-owned by Alabama Power and Georgia Power. See BUSINESS in Item 1 herein for additional information.
 
(8)(9) Capacity shown is Georgia Power’s portion (50.1%) of total plant capacity.
 
(9)(10) Capacity shown is Georgia Power’s portion (45.7%) of total plant capacity.
 
(10)(11) Capacity shown represents 33 1/3% of total plant capacity. Georgia Power owns a 1/3 interest in the unit with 100% use of the unit from June through September. Progress Energy Florida operates the unit.
 
(11)(12) Generation is dedicated to a single industrial customer.
 
(12)(13) Capacity shown is Southern Power’s portion (65%) of total plant capacity.
 
(13)(14) Capacity shown is Georgia Power’s portion (25.4%) of total plant capacity. OPC operates the plant.
Except as discussed below under “Titles to Property,” the principal plants and other important units of the traditional operating companies, Southern Power, and SEGCO are owned in fee by the respective companies. It is the opinion of management of each such company that its operating properties are adequately maintained and are substantially in good operating condition.
Mississippi Power owns a 79-mile length of 500-kilovolt transmission line which is leased to Entergy Gulf States. The line, completed in 1984, extends from Plant Daniel to the Louisiana state line. Entergy Gulf States is paying a use fee over a 40-year period covering all expenses and the amortization of the original $57 million cost of the line. At December 31, 2008,2009, the unamortized portion of this cost was approximately $23$21 million.
In 2008,2009, the maximum demand on the traditional operating companies, Southern Power, and SEGCO was 37,166,00034,471,000 kilowatts and occurred on August 6, 2008.June 22, 2009. The all-time maximum demand of 38,777,000 kilowatts on the traditional operating companies, Southern Power, and SEGCO occurred on August 22, 2007. These amounts exclude demand served by capacity retained by MEAG Power, OPC, and SEPA. The reserve margin for the traditional operating companies, Southern Power, and SEGCO in 20082009 was 15.3%26.4%. See SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA in Item 6 herein for additional information on peak demands.

I-29I-30


Jointly-Owned Facilities
Alabama Power, Georgia Power, and Southern Power have undivided interests in certain generating plants and other related facilities to or from non-affiliated parties. The percentages of ownership are as follows:
                                    
                                     Percentage Ownership
 Percentage Ownership Progress        
 Progress         Total Alabama Power Georgia MEAG Energy Southern      
 Total Alabama Power Georgia Energy Southern       Capacity Power South Power OPC Power Dalton Florida Power OUC FMPA KUA
 Capacity Power South Power OPC MEAG Dalton Florida Power OUC FMPA KUA  
 (Megawatts)  (Megawatts) 
Plant Miller
Units 1 and 2
 1,320  91.8%  8.2%  %  %  %  %  %  %  %  %  % 1,320  91.8%  8.2%  %  %  %  %  %  %  %  %  %
Plant Hatch 1,796   50.1 30.0 17.7 2.2       1,796   50.1 30.0 17.7 2.2      
Plant Vogtle 2,320   45.7 30.0 22.7 1.6       2,320   45.7 30.0 22.7 1.6      
Plant Scherer
Units 1 and 2
 1,636   8.4 60.0 30.2 1.4       1,636   8.4 60.0 30.2 1.4      
Plant Wansley 1,779   53.5 30.0 15.1 1.4       1,779   53.5 30.0 15.1 1.4      
Rocky Mountain 848   25.4 74.6         848   25.4 74.6        
Intercession City, FL 143   33.3    66.7      143   33.3    66.7     
Plant Stanton A 660         65%  28%  3.5%  3.5% 660         65%  28%  3.5%  3.5%
Alabama Power and Georgia Power have contracted to operate and maintain the respective units in which each has an interest (other than Rocky Mountain and Intercession City) as agent for the joint owners. SCS provides operation and maintenance services for Plant Stanton A.
In addition, Georgia Power has commitments regarding a portion of a five percent interest in Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2 owned by MEAG Power that are in effect until the later of retirement of the plant or the latest stated maturity date of MEAG’sMEAG Power’s bonds issued to finance such ownership interest. The payments for capacity are required whether any capacity is available. The energy cost is a function of each unit’s variable operating costs. Except for the portion of the capacity payments related to the Georgia PSC’s disallowances of Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2 costs, the cost of such capacity and energy is included in purchased power from non-affiliates in Georgia Power’s statements of income in Item 8 herein. Also see Note 7 to the financial statements of Georgia Power under “Commitments – Purchased Power Commitments” in Item 8 herein for additional information.
Titles to Property
The traditional operating companies’, Southern Power’s, and SEGCO’s interests in the principal plants (other than certain pollution control facilities, one small hydroelectric generating station leased by Georgia Power, combined cycle units at Plant Daniel leased by Mississippi Power, and the land on which five combustion turbine generators of Mississippi Power are located, which is held by easement) and other important units of the respective companies are owned in fee by such companies, subject only to the liens pursuant to pollution control revenue bonds of Alabama Power and Gulf Power on specific pollution control facilities. See Note 6 to the financial statements of Southern Company, Alabama Power, and Gulf Power under “Assets Subject to Lien” and Note 7 to the financial statements of Mississippi Power under “Operating Leases – Plant Daniel Combined Cycle Generating Units” in Item 8 herein for additional information. The traditional operating companies own the fee interests in certain of their principal plants as tenants in common. See “Jointly-Owned Facilities” herein for additional information. Properties such as electric transmission and distribution lines and steam heating mains are constructed principally on rights-of-way which are maintained under franchise or are held by easement only. A substantial portion of lands submerged by reservoirs is held under flood right easements.

I-30I-31


Item 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
(1) United States of America v. Alabama Power(United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama)
       United States of America v. Georgia Power(United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia)
See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and each traditional operating company under “Environmental Matters – New Source Review Actions” in Item 8 herein for information.
(2) Environmental Remediation
See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power under “Environmental Matters – Environmental Remediation” and Note 3 to the financial statements of Mississippi Power under “Retail Regulatory Matters – Environmental Compliance Overview Plan” in Item 8 herein for information related to environmental remediation.
(3) In re: Mirant Corporation, et al.(United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas)
See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company under “Mirant Matters – Mirant Bankruptcy” in Item 8 herein for information.
(4) MC Asset Recovery, LLC v. Southern Company(United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia) (formerly styledIn re: Mirant Corporation, et al.in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas)
See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company under “Mirant Matters – MC Asset Recovery Litigation” in Item 8 herein for information.
(5) In re: Mirant Corporation Securities Litigation(United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia)
See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company under “Mirant Matters – Mirant Securities Litigation” in Item 8 herein for information.
(6) Right of Way Litigation
See Note 3 to the financial statements of Southern Company and Mississippi Power under “Right of Way Litigation” in Item 8 herein for information.
See Note 3 to the financial statements of each registrant in Item 8 herein for descriptions of additional legal and administrative proceedings discussed therein.

I-31


Item 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS.
Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, and SouthernPower
None.

I-32


EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF SOUTHERN COMPANY
(Identification of executive officers of Southern Company is inserted in Part I in accordance with Regulation S-K, Item 401(b), Instruction 3.)The ages of the officers set forth below are as of December 31, 2008.2009.
David M. Ratcliffe
Chairman, President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
Age 60
61
Elected in 1999. President since April 2004; Chairman and Chief Executive Officer since July 2004. Previously served as Chief Executive Officer of Georgia Power from June 1999 to April 2004.
W. Paul Bowers
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Age 52
53
Elected in 2001. Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer since February 2008 and Executive Vice President since May 2007. Previously served as President of Southern Company Generation, a business unit of Southern Company, and Executive Vice President of SCS from May 2001 through January 2008; and President and Chief Executive Officer of Southern Power from May 2001 through March 2005.
Thomas A. Fanning
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
Age 51
52
Elected in 2003. Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer since February 2008. Previously served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer from May 2007 through January 2008 and Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer from April 2003 to May 2007.
Michael D. Garrett
Executive Vice President
Age 59
60
Elected in 2004. Executive Vice President since January 2004. He also serves as Chief Executive Officer, President, and Director of Georgia Power since January 2004 and Chief Executive Officer of Georgia Power since April 2004.
G. Edison Holland, Jr.
Executive Vice President, General Counsel, and Secretary
Age 56
57
Elected in 2001. Executive Vice President and General Counsel since April 2001.
C. Alan Martin
President and Chief
Executive Officer of SCSVice President
Age 60
61
Elected in 2008. Executive Vice President since February 2008. He also serves as President and Chief Executive Officer of SCS since February 2008. Previously served as Executive Vice President of the Customer Service Organization at Alabama Power from May 2001 through January 2008.
Charles D. McCrary
Executive Vice President
Age 57
58
Elected in 1998. Executive Vice President of Southern Company since February 2002; President,2002. He also serves as Chief Executive Officer, President, and Director of Alabama Power since October 2001.

I-33


James H. Miller, III
President and Chief Executive Officer of Southern Nuclear
Age 59
60
Elected in 2008. President and Chief Executive Officer of Southern Nuclear since August 27, 2008. Previously served as Senior Vice President and General Counsel of Georgia Power from March 2004 through August 2008 and Vice 2008.
Susan N. Story
President and Associate General Counsel for SCSChief Executive Officer of Gulf Power
Age 49
Elected in 2003. President and Senior Vice Chief Executive Officer of Gulf Power since April 2003.
Anthony J. Topazi
President General Counsel, and Assistant SecretaryChief Executive Officer of SouthernMississippi Power from August 2001 through February
Age 59
Elected in 2003. President and Chief Executive Officer of Mississippi Power since January 2004.
Christopher C. Womack
Executive Vice President
Age 50
51
Elected in 2008. Executive Vice President and President of External Affairs since January 1, 2009. Previously served as Executive Vice President of External Affairs of Georgia Power from March 2006 through December 2008 and Senior Vice President of Fossil and Hydro Generation and Senior Production Officer of Georgia Power from December 2001 to February 2006.
The officers of Southern Company were elected for a term running from the first meeting of the directors following the last annual meeting (May 28, 2008)27, 2009) for one year until the first board meeting after the next annual meeting or until their successors are elected and have qualified, except for Mr. Miller whose election was effective on August 27, 2008 and Mr. Womack whose election was effective on January 1, 2009.qualified.

I-34


EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF ALABAMA POWER
(Identification of executive officers of Alabama Power is inserted in Part I in accordance with Regulation S-K, Item 401(b), Instruction 3.)The ages of the officers set forth below are as of December 31, 2008.2009.
Charles D. McCrary
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
Age 57
58
Elected in 2001. President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director since October 2001; Executive Vice President of Southern Company since February 2002.
Art P. Beattie
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer
Age 54
55
Elected in 2004. Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer since February 2005. Previously served as Vice President and Comptroller of Alabama Power from 1998 through January 2005.
Mark A. Crosswhite
Executive Vice President
Age 46
47
Elected in 2008. Executive Vice President of External Affairs since February 1, 2008. Previously served as Senior Vice President and Counsel of Alabama Power from July 2006 through January 2008; Senior Vice President, General Counsel, and Assistant Secretary of Southern Power from March 2004 through January 2005; and Vice President of SCS from March 2004 through January 2008.
Steven R. Spencer
Executive Vice President
Age 53
54
Elected in 2001. Executive Vice President of the Customer Service Organization since February 1, 2008. Previously served as Executive Vice President of External Affairs from 2001 through January 2008.
Jerry L. Stewart
Senior Vice President
Age 59
60
Elected in 1999. Senior Vice President of Fossil and Hydro Generation since 1999.
The officers of Alabama Power were elected for a term running from the last annual organizational meeting of the directors (April 25, 2008)held on April 24, 2009 for one year until the next annual meeting or until their successors are elected and have qualified.

I-35


EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF GEORGIA POWER
(Identification of executive officers of Georgia Power is inserted in Part I in accordance with Regulation S-K, Item 401(b), Instruction 3.) The ages of the officers set forth below are as of December 31, 2008.2009.
Michael D. Garrett
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
Age 59
60
Elected in 2003. President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director of Georgia Power since April 2004. Previously served as President and Director of Georgia Power from January 2004 to April 2004.
Mickey A. Brown
Executive Vice President
Age 61
62
Elected in 2001. Executive Vice President of the Customer Service Organization since January 2005. Previously served as Senior Vice President of Distribution from May 2001 through December 2004.
Cliff S. ThrasherRonnie R. Labrato
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer
Age 58
56
Elected in 2005.2009. Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer since March 2005.April 2009. Previously served as Senior Vice President Comptroller,of Internal Auditing at SCS from April 2008 to March 2009 and Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of SouthernGulf Power from November 2002July 2001 to March 2005 and2008.
Joseph A. Miller
Executive Vice President
Age 48
Elected in 2009. Executive Vice President of SCS from June 2002 to March 2005.
Judy M. Anderson
Senior Vice President
Age 60
Elected in 2001. SeniorNuclear Development since May 2009. Also serves as Executive Vice President of Charitable GivingNuclear Development at Southern Nuclear since 2001.February 2006. Previously served as Vice President of Government Relations at SCS from May 1999 to January 2006.
W. Craig Barrs
Senior
Executive Vice President
Age 51
52
Elected in 2008. SeniorExecutive Vice President of External Affairs since January 2009.2010. Previously served as Senior Vice President of External Affairs from January 2009 to January 2010, Vice President of Governmental and Regulatory Affairs from April 2008 to December 2008, Vice President of the Coastal Region from August 2006 to March 2008, President and Chief Executive Officer of Savannah Electric and Power Company from January 2006 until its merger with and into Georgia Power which was completed in July 2006, and Vice President of Community and Economic Development from November 2002 to December 2005.
Douglas E. Jones
Senior Vice President
Age 50
51
Elected in 2005. Senior Vice President of Fossil and Hydro Generation since March 2006. Previously served as Senior Vice President of Customer Service and Sales from January 2005 to February 2006 and Executive Vice President of Southern Power from January 2004 to January 2005.
Thomas P. Bishop
Senior Vice President, Chief Compliance Officer, and General Counsel
Age 48
49
Elected in 2008. Senior Vice President, Chief Compliance Officer, and General Counsel since September 2008. Previously served as Vice President and Associate General Counsel for SCS from July 2004 to September 2008 and Managing Attorney for SCS from April 1997 to July 2004.2008.
Each of the above is currently an executive officerThe officers of Georgia Power servingwere elected for a term running from the last annual organizational meeting of the directors (May 21, 2008)held on May 20, 2009 for one year until the next annual meeting or until their successors are elected and qualified, except for Mr. Bishop and Mr. Barrs whose elections were effective September 22, 2008 and January 1, 2009, respectively.have qualified.

I-36


EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF MISSISSIPPI POWER
(Identification of executive officers of Mississippi Power is inserted in Part I in accordance with Regulation S-K, Item 401(b), Instruction 3.) The ages of the officers set forth below are as of December 31, 2008.2009.
Anthony J. Topazi
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
Age 58
59
Elected in 2003. President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director since January 1, 2004.
Thomas O. Anderson, IV
Vice President
Age 50
Elected in 2009. Vice President of Generation Development since July 2009. Previously served as Project Director, Mississippi Power Generation Development from March 2008 to July 2009; Project Manager, Southern Power Generation from June 2007 to March 2008; and Generation Development Manager, SCS Generation Development from September 1998 to June 2007.
John W. Atherton
Vice President
Age 48
49
Elected in 2004. Vice President of External Affairs since January 2005. Previously served as the Director of Economic Development from September 2003 to January 2005.
Kimberly D. Flowers
Vice President
Age 45
Elected in 2005. Vice President and Senior Production Officer since March 2005. Previously served as Plant Manager, Plant Bowen, Georgia Power from November 2000 until March 2005.
Donald R. Horsley
Vice President
Age 54
55
Elected in 2006. Vice President of Customer Services and Retail Marketing since April 2006. Previously served as Vice President of Transmission at Alabama Power from March 2005 to March 2006 and Manager, Transmission Lines at Alabama Power from February 2001 to March 2005.
Frances Turnage
Vice President, Treasurer, and
Chief Financial Officer
Age 60
61
Elected in 2005. Vice President, Treasurer, and Chief Financial Officer since March 2005. Previously served as Comptroller from 1993 to March 2005.
The officers of Mississippi Power were elected for a term running from the last annual organizational meeting of the directors (April 9, 2008)held on April 8, 2009 for one year until the next annual meeting or until their successors are elected and have qualified.

I-37


PART II
Item 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANTS’ COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
(a)(1) The common stock of Southern Company is listed and traded on the New York Stock Exchange. The common stock is also traded on regional exchanges across the United States. The high and low stock prices as reported on the New York Stock Exchange for each quarter of the past two years were as follows:
                
 High Low
2009
 
First Quarter $37.62 $26.48 
Second Quarter 32.05 27.19 
Third Quarter 32.67 30.27 
Fourth Quarter 34.47 30.89 
 High Low 
2008
  
First Quarter $40.60 $33.71  $40.60 $33.71 
Second Quarter 37.81 34.28  37.81 34.28 
Third Quarter 40.00 34.46  40.00 34.46 
Fourth Quarter 38.18 29.82  38.18 29.82 
 
2007
 
First Quarter $37.25 $34.85 
Second Quarter 38.90 33.50 
Third Quarter 37.70 33.16 
Fourth Quarter 39.35 35.15 
There is no market for the other registrants’ common stock, all of which is owned by Southern Company.
(a)(2) Number of Southern Company’s common stockholders of record at DecemberJanuary 31, 2008:  97,3242010:      92,374
Each of the other registrants have one common stockholder, Southern Company.
(a)(3) Dividends on each registrant’s common stock are payable at the discretion of their respective board of directors. The dividends on common stock declared by Southern Company and the traditional operating companies to their stockholder(s) for the past two years were as follows:
            
          
Registrant Quarter 2008 2007 Quarter 2009 2008
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
Southern Company
 First $307,960 $290,292  First $326,780 $307,960 
 Second 343,446 322,634 
 Second 322,634 303,699  Third 348,702 323,844 
 Third 323,844 304,775  Fourth 350,538 325,681 
 Fourth 325,681 306,039 
    
Alabama Power
 First 122,825 116,250  First 130,700 122,825 
 Second 122,825 116,250  Second 130,700 122,825 
 Third 122,825 116,250  Third 130,700 122,825 
 Fourth 122,825 116,250  Fourth 130,700 122,825 
   
 
Georgia Power
 First 180,300 172,475  First 184,725 180,300 
 Second 184,725 180,300 
 Second 180,300 172,475  Third 184,725 180,300 
 Third 180,300 172,475  Fourth 184,725 180,300 
 Fourth 180,300 172,475 
    
Gulf Power
 First 20,425 18,525  First 22,350 20,425 
 Second 20,425 18,525  Second 22,300 20,425 
 Third 20,425 18,525  Third 22,325 20,425 
 Fourth 20,425 18,525  Fourth 22,325 20,425 
   
 
Mississippi Power
 First 17,100 16,825  First 17,125 17,100 
 Second 17,100 16,825  Second 17,125 17,100 
 Third 17,100 16,825  Third 17,125 17,100 
 Fourth 17,100 16,825  Fourth 17,125 17,100 

II-1


In 20072009 and 2008, Southern Power paid dividends to Southern Company as follows:
          
            
Registrant Quarter 2008 2007 Quarter 2009 2008
 (in millions) (in millions) 
Southern Power
 First $23.63 $22.45  First $26.525 $23.63 
 Second 23.63 22.45  Second 26.525 23.63 
 Third 23.63 22.45  Third 26.525 23.63 
 Fourth 23.63 22.45  Fourth 26.525 23.63 
The dividend paid per share of Southern Company’s common stock was 38.75¢40.25¢ for the first quarter of 20072008 and 40.25¢42¢ for the remaining quarters in 2007 and the first quarter of 2008. For the second, third, and fourth quarters of 2008, the2008. In 2009, Southern Company paid a dividend paid per share of Southern Company’s common stock was 42¢. in the first quarter of 2009 and 43.75¢ for the second, third, and fourth quarters of 2009.
The traditional operating companies and Southern Power can only pay dividends to Southern Company out of retained earnings or paid-in-capital.
Southern Power’s credit facility and senior note indenture contain potential limitations on the payment of common stock dividends. At December 31, 2008,2009, Southern Power was in compliance with the conditions of this credit facility and thus had no restrictions on its ability to pay common stock dividends. See Note 8 to the financial statements of Southern Company under “Common Stock Dividend Restrictions” and Note 6 to the financial statements of Southern Power under “Dividend Restrictions” in Item 8 herein for additional information regarding these restrictions.
(a)(4) Securities authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans.
See Part III, Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters under the heading “Equity Compensation Plan Information” herein.
(b) Use of Proceeds
Not applicable.
(c) Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
None.
Item 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
Item 6.SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
Southern Company. See “SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA,” contained herein at pages II-106II-95 and II-107.II-96.
Alabama Power. See “SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA,” contained herein at pages II-170II-167 and II-171.II-168.
Georgia Power. See “SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA,” contained herein at pages II-239II-242 and II-240.II-243.
Gulf Power. See “SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA,” contained herein at pages II-298II-308 and II-299.II-309.
Mississippi Power. See “SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA,” contained herein at pages II-363II-382 and II-364.II-383.
Southern Power. See “SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA,” contained herein at page II-406.II-430.
Item 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Item 7.MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Southern Company. See “MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS,” contained herein at pages II-12II-11 through II-49.II-39.

II-2


Alabama Power. See “MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS,” contained herein at pages II-111II-100 through II-132.II-122.
Georgia Power. See “MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS,” contained herein at pages II-175II-172 through II-198.II-195.
Gulf Power. See “MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS,” contained herein at pages II-244II-247 through II-265.II-267.
Mississippi Power. See “MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS,” contained herein at pages II-303II-313 through II-327.II-338.
Southern Power. See “MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS,” contained herein at pages II-368II-387 through II-386.II-406.
Item 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Item 7A.QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
See MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY – “Market Price Risk” of each of the registrants in Item 7 herein and Note 1 of each of the registrant’s financial statements under “Financial Instruments” in Item 8 herein. See also Note 610 to the financial statements of Southern Company, each traditional operating company,Alabama Power, and Georgia Power, Note 9 to the financial statements of Gulf Power and Mississippi Power, and Note 8 to the financial statements of Southern Power under “Financial Instruments” in Item 8 herein.

II-3


Item 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
Item 8.FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
INDEX TO 20082009 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
   
  Page
  
 II-9
 II-10
 II-50II-40
 II-51II-41
 II-52II-42
 II-54II-44
 II-56II-46
 II-56II-47
 II-57II-48
   
  
 II-109II-98
 II-110II-99
 II-133II-123
 II-134II-124
 II-135II-125
 II-137II-127
 II-139II-129
 II-139II-130
 II-140II-131
   
  
 II-173II-170
 II-174II-171
 II-199II-196
 II-200II-197
 II-201II-198
 II-203II-200
 II-204II-201
 II-204II-202
 II-205II-203
   
  
 II-242II-245
 II-243II-246
 II-266II-268
 II-267II-269
 II-268II-270
 II-270II-272
 II-271II-273
 II-271II-274
 II-272II-275

II-4


   
  Page
  
 II-301II-311
 II-302II-312
 II-328II-339
 II-329II-340
 II-330II-341
 II-332II-343
 II-333II-344
 II-333II-345
 II-334II-346
   
  
 II-366II-385
 II-367II-386
 II-387II-407
 II-388II-408
 II-389II-409
 II-391II-411
 II-391II-412
 II-392II-413
Item 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
Item 9.CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
None.

II-5


Item 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Item 9A.CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Disclosure Controls And Procedures.
As of the end of the period covered by this annual report, Southern Company conducted an evaluation under the supervision and with the participation of Southern Company’s management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Sections 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934). Based upon this evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures are effective.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.
     (a) Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.
Southern Company’s Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting is included on page II-9 of this Form 10-K.
     (b) Attestation Report of the Registered Public Accounting Firm.
The report of Deloitte & Touche LLP, Southern Company’s independent registered public accounting firm, regarding Southern Company’s internal control over financial reporting is included on pagespage II-10 and II-11 of this Form 10-K.
     (c) Changes in internal controls.
There have been no changes in Southern Company’s internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) during the fourth quarter 20082009 that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect Southern Company’s internal control over financial reporting.reporting other than as described in the next paragraph.
In October 2009, Georgia Power implemented a new general ledger system. The implementation of this system provides additional operational and internal control benefits including system security and automation of previously manual controls. This process improvement initiative was not in response to an identified internal control deficiency.
Item 9A(T). CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Item 9A(T).CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Disclosure Controls And Procedures.
As of the end of the period covered by this annual report, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, and Southern Power conducted separate evaluations under the supervision and with the participation of each company’s management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Sections 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934). Based upon these evaluations, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer, in each case, concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures are effective.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.
     (a) Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.
Alabama Power’s Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting is included on page II-109II-98 of this Form 10-K.
Georgia Power’s Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting is included on page II-173II-170 of this Form 10-K.
Gulf Power’s Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting is included on page II-242II-245 of this Form 10-K.

II-6


Mississippi Power’s Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting is included on page II-301II-311 of this Form 10-K.
Southern Power’s Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting is included on page II-366II-385 of this Form 10-K.
(b) Changes in internal controls.
(b)Changes in internal controls.
There have been no changes in Alabama Power’s, Georgia Power’s, Gulf Power’s, Mississippi Power’s, or Southern Power’s internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) during the fourth quarter 20082009 that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect Alabama Power’s, Georgia Power’s, Gulf Power’s, Mississippi Power’s, or Southern Power’s internal control over financial reporting.
There have been no changes in Georgia Power’s internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) during the fourth quarter 2009 that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect Georgia Power’s internal control over financial reporting, other than as described in the next sentence. In October 2009, Georgia Power implemented a new general ledger system. The implementation of this system provides additional operational and internal control benefits including system security and automation of previously manual controls. This process improvement initiative was not in response to an identified internal control deficiency.
Item 9B.
Item 9B.OTHER INFORMATION
Georgia Power
     None.On February 23, 2010, Georgia Power, acting for itself and as agent for OPC, MEAG Power, and Dalton (collectively, Owners), and a consortium consisting of Westinghouse and Stone & Webster (collectively, Consortium) entered into an amendment (Amendment) to the Engineering, Procurement, and Construction Agreement, dated as of April 8, 2008 (Agreement), between the Owners and the Consortium, relating to Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4. Under the Agreement, the Owners agreed to pay a purchase price that will be subject to certain price escalation and adjustments, including certain index-based adjustments, as well as adjustments for change orders, and performance bonuses. The Amendment, which is subject to the approval of the Georgia PSC, replaces certain of the index-based adjustments to the purchase price with fixed escalation amounts.
See MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS – FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “Construction – Nuclear” of Georgia Power in Item 7 herein and Note 3 to the financial statements of Georgia Power under “Construction – Nuclear” in Item 8 herein for information regarding Georgia Power’s construction of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4.

II-7


THE SOUTHERN COMPANY
AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES
FINANCIAL SECTION

II-8


MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
Southern Company’s management is responsible for establishing and maintaining an adequate system of internal control over financial reporting as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). A control system can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.
Under management’s supervision, an evaluation of the design and effectiveness of Southern Company’s internal control over financial reporting was conducted based on the framework inInternal Control—Integrated Frameworkissued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this evaluation, management concluded that Southern Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2008.2009.
Deloitte & Touche LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as auditors of Southern Company’s financial statements, has issued an attestation report on the effectiveness of Southern Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008.2009. Deloitte & Touche LLP’s report on Southern Company’s internal control over financial reporting is included herein.
/s/ David M. Ratcliffe

David M. Ratcliffe
Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer
/s/ W. Paul Bowers

W. Paul Bowers
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
February 25, 20092010

II-9


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Southern Company
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets and consolidated statements of capitalization of Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies (the “Company”) as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, and the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, common stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008.2009. We also have audited the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008,2009, based on criteria established inInternal Control — Integrated Frameworkissued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting (page II-9). Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and an opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or under the supervision of, the company’s principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, and effected by the company’s board of directors, management, and other personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of the inherent limitations of internal control over financial reporting, including the possibility of collusion or improper management override of controls, material misstatements due to error or fraud may not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Also, projections of any evaluation of the effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting to future periods are subject to the risk that the controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

II-10


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM (continued)
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements (pages II-50II-40 to II-104)II-93) referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008,2009, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Also, in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008,2009, based on the criteria established inInternal Control — Integrated Frameworkissued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
February 25, 20092010

II-11II-10


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
OVERVIEW
Business Activities
The primary business of Southern Company (the Company) is electricity sales in the Southeast by the traditional operating companies – Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power – and Southern Power. The four traditional operating companies are vertically integrated utilities providing electric service in four Southeastern states. Southern Power constructs, acquires, owns, and manages generation assets and sells electricity at market-based rates in the wholesale market.
Many factors affect the opportunities, challenges, and risks of Southern Company’s electricity business. These factors include the traditional operating companies’ ability to maintain a constructive regulatory environment, to maintain energy sales ingiven the midsteffects of the current economic downturn,recession, and to effectively manage and secure timely recovery of rising costs. Each of the traditional operating companies has various regulatory mechanisms that operate to address cost recovery. Since 2005, the traditional operating companies have completed a number of regulatory proceedings that provide for the timely recovery of costs. Appropriately balancing required costs and capital expenditures with customer prices will continue to challenge the Company for the foreseeable future.
Another major factor is the profitability of the competitive market-based wholesale generating business and federal regulatory policy, which may impact Southern Company’s level of participation in this market. The Company continues to face regulatory challenges related to transmission issues at the national level. Southern Power continues to execute its strategy through a combination of acquiring and constructing new power plants and by entering into power purchase agreements (PPAs) with investor owned utilities, independent power producers, municipalities, and electric cooperatives. The Company continues to face regulatory challenges related to transmission and market power issues at the national level.
Southern Company’s other business activities include investments in leveraged lease projects, telecommunications,renewable energy projects, and energy-related services.telecommunications. Management continues to evaluate the contribution of each of these remaining activities to total shareholder return and may pursue acquisitions and dispositions accordingly.
Key Performance Indicators
In striving to maximize shareholder value while providing cost-effective energy to more than four million customers, Southern Company continues to focus on several key indicators. These indicators include customer satisfaction, plant availability, system reliability, and earnings per share (EPS), excluding charges related to leveraged leases.the MC Asset Recovery, LLC (MC Asset Recovery) litigation settlement discussed below. Southern Company’s financial success is directly tied to the satisfaction of its customers. Key elements of ensuring customer satisfaction include outstanding service, high reliability, and competitive prices. Management uses customer satisfaction surveys and reliability indicators to evaluate the Company’s results.
Peak season equivalent forced outage rate (Peak Season EFOR) is an indicator of fossil/hydro and nuclear plant availability and efficient generation fleet operations during the months when generation needs are greatest. The rate is calculated by dividing the number of hours of forced outages by total generation hours. The fossil/hydro 20082009 Peak Season EFOR of 1.68%1.44% was better than the target. The nuclear generating fleet also uses Peak Season EFOR as an indicator of availability and efficient generation fleet operations during the peak season. The nuclear 20082009 Peak Season EFOR of 1.98%2.61% was slightly better than the target. Transmission and distribution system reliability performance is measured by the frequency and duration of outages. Performance targets for reliability are set internally based on historical performance, expected weather conditions, and expected capital expenditures. The performance for 20082009 was better than the target for these reliability measures.

II-12


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company entered into a settlement agreement with MC Asset Recovery to resolve a complaint alleging that Southern Company caused Mirant Corporation (Mirant) to engage in certain fraudulent transfers and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
to pay illegal dividends to Southern Company’s investments include three leveraged lease transactions whose tax deductions have been challenged byCompany prior to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Ongoingspin-off of Mirant in 2001. Pursuant to the settlement, negotiations with the IRS resulted inSouthern Company recorded a charge to income of $83$202 million or 11 cents per share, in 2008.2009. The settlement has been completed and resolves all claims by MC Asset Recovery against Southern Company. Southern Company management uses the non-GAAP (defined below) measure of EPS, excluding leveraged lease charges,the MC Asset Recovery litigation settlement, to evaluate the performance of Southern Company’s ongoing business activities. Southern Company believes the presentation of this non-GAAP measure of earnings and EPS excluding the leveraged lease chargesMC Asset Recovery litigation settlement is useful for investors because it provides investorsearnings information that is consistent with additional information for purposesthe historical and ongoing business activities of comparing Southern Company’s performance for such periods.the Company. The presentation of this additional information is not meant to be considered a substitute for financial measures prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.principles (GAAP).

II-11


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Southern Company’s 20082009 results compared with its targets for some of these key indicators are reflected in the following chart:
             
 2008 Target 2008 Actual 2009 Target 2009 Actual
Key Performance Indicator Performance Performance Performance Performance
 Top quartile in   Top quartile in  
Customer Satisfaction
 customer surveys Top quartile customer surveys Top quartile
Peak Season EFOR — fossil/hydro
 2.75% or less  1.68% 2.75% or less  1.44%
Peak Season EFOR — nuclear
 2.00% or less  1.98% 2.75% or less  2.61%
Basic EPS
 $2.28 — $2.36 $2.26  $2.30 — $2.45 $2.07 
EPS, excluding leveraged lease charges
  $2.37 
EPS, excluding the MC Asset Recovery litigation settlement
  $2.32 
See RESULTS OF OPERATIONS herein for additional information on the Company’s financial performance. The financial performance achieved in 20082009 reflects the continued emphasis that management places on these indicators as well as the commitment shown by employees in achieving or exceeding management’s expectations.
Earnings
Southern Company’s net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries was $1.74$1.64 billion in 2008, an increase2009, a decrease of $8$99 million from the prior year. ComparedThis decrease was primarily the result of a litigation settlement with the prior year, increasesMC Asset Recovery, a decrease in retail rates and increasesrevenues from lower kilowatt-hour (KWH) demand across all customer classes, a decrease in revenues from market-response rates to large commercial and industrial customers, were mostlyhigher depreciation and amortization, higher interest expense, and unfavorable weather. The 2009 decrease was partially offset by higher asset depreciation, milder summer temperatures compared to 2007, higher non-fuelan increase in revenues from customer charges at Alabama Power, increased recognition of environmental compliance cost recovery (ECCR) revenues at Georgia Power in accordance with its retail rate plan for the years 2008 through 2010 (2007 Retail Rate Plan), lower operations and maintenance expenses, chargesan increase in allowance for funds used during construction (AFUDC) equity, which is not taxable, a 2008 charge related to the tax treatment of leveraged lease business,investments, and exitinga gain on the synthetic fuel business in 2007.early retirement of two international leveraged lease investments. Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries was $1.74 billion in 2008 and $1.73 billion in 2007 and $1.57 billion in 2006, reflecting a 10.2% increase and a 1.1% decrease, respectively, over the prior year.2007. Basic EPS was $2.07 in 2009, $2.26 in 2008, and $2.29 in 2007, and $2.12 in 2006.2007. Diluted EPS, which factors in additional shares related to stock-based compensation, was $2.06 in 2009, $2.25 in 2008, and $2.28 in 2007, and $2.10 in 2006.2007.
Dividends
Southern Company has paid dividends on its common stock since 1948. Dividends paid per share of common stock were $1.7325 in 2009, $1.6625 in 2008, and $1.595 in 2007, and $1.535 in 2006.2007. In January 2009,2010, Southern Company declared a quarterly dividend of 4243.75 cents per share. This is the 245th249th consecutive quarter that Southern Company has paid a dividend equal to or higher than the previous quarter. The Company targets a dividend payout ratio of approximately 65% to 70% of net income. For 2008,2009, the actual payout ratio was 73.5%83.3% while the payout ratio of net income excluding leveraged lease chargesthe MC Asset Recovery litigation settlement was 70.1%74.2%.

II-13II-12


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Electricity Business
Southern Company’s electric utilities generate and sell electricity to retail and wholesale customers in the Southeast. A condensed statement of income for the electricity business follows:
                
 Increase (Decrease) 
                 Amount from Prior Year 
 Increase (Decrease) 
 Amount from Prior Year  2009 2009 2008 2007 
 2008 2008 2007 2006 
 (in millions)  (in millions) 
Electric operating revenues $17,000 $1,860 $1,052 $810  $15,642 $(1,358) $1,860 $1,052 
Fuel 6,817 973 701 655  5,952  (865) 973 701 
Purchased power 815 300  (28)  (188) 474  (341) 300  (28)
Other operations and maintenance 3,584 111 183 70  3,401  (183) 111 183 
Depreciation and amortization 1,414 199 51 27  1,476 62 199 51 
Taxes other than income taxes 794 56 23 39  816 22 56 23 
Total electric operating expenses 13,424 1,639 930 603  12,119  (1,305) 1,639 930 
Operating income 3,576 221 122 207  3,523  (53) 221 122 
Other income (expense), net 145 24 68  (9) 199 53 26 66 
Interest expense and dividends 837 25 61 75 
Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized 834 61 10 46 
Income taxes 1,037 87 1 50  988  (49) 87 1 
Net income $1,847 $133 $128 $73  1,900  (12) 150 141 
Dividends on preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries 65  17 13 
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries $1,835 $(12) $133 $128 
Electric Operating Revenues
Details of electric operating revenues were as follows:
            
 Amount
            
 Amount 2009 2008 2007
 2008 2007 2006
 (in millions) (in millions)
Retail — prior year $12,639 $11,801 $11,165  $14,055 $12,639 $11,801 
Estimated change in —  
Rates and pricing 668 161 9  144 668 161 
Sales growth  60 115 
Sales growth (decline)  (208)  60 
Weather  (106) 54 35   (21)  (106) 54 
Fuel and other cost recovery 854 563 477   (663) 854 563 
Retail — current year 14,055 12,639 11,801  13,307 14,055 12,639 
Wholesale revenues 2,400 1,988 1,822  1,802 2,400 1,988 
Other electric operating revenues 545 513 465  533 545 513 
Electric operating revenues $17,000 $15,140 $14,088  $15,642 $17,000 $15,140 
Percent change  12.3%  7.5%  6.1%  (8.0%)  12.3%  7.5%

II-13


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Retail revenues decreased $748 million, increased $1.4 billion, and increased $838 million in 2009, 2008, and $636 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. The significant factors driving these changes are shown in the preceding table. The increase in rates and pricing in 2009 was primarily due to an increase in revenues from customer charges at Alabama Power and increased recognition of ECCR revenues at Georgia Power in accordance with its 2007 Retail Rate Plan, partially offset by a decrease in revenues from market-response rates to large commercial and industrial customers at Georgia Power. The 2008 increase in rates and pricing when compared to the prior year was primarily due to Alabama Power’s increase under its Rate Stabilization and Equalization Plan (Rate RSE), as ordered by the Alabama Public Service Commission (PSC), and Georgia Power’s increase under its 2007 retail rate

II-14


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
plan,Retail Rate Plan, as ordered by the Georgia PSC. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Alabama Power Retail Regulatory Matters” and “Georgia Power Retail Regulatory Matters” for additional information. Also contributing to the 2008 increase was an increase in revenues from market-response rates to large commercial and industrial customers at Georgia Power.customers. The 2007 increase in rates and pricing when compared to the prior year was primarily due to Alabama Power’s increase under its Rate RSE, as ordered by the Alabama PSC. Partially offsetting the 2007 increase was a decrease in revenues from market-response rates to large commercial and industrial customers at Georgia Power. The 2006 increase in rates and pricing when compared to the prior year was not material.customers. See “Energy Sales” below for a discussion of changes in the volume of energy sold, including changes related to sales growth (decline) and weather.
Electric rates for the traditional operating companies include provisions to adjust billings for fluctuations in fuel costs, including the energy component of purchased power costs. Under these provisions, fuel revenues generally equal fuel expenses, including the fuel component of purchased power, and do not affect net income. The traditional operating companies may also have one or more regulatory mechanisms to recover other costs such as environmental, storm damage, new plants, and PPAs.
Wholesale revenues consist of PPAs with investor-owned utilities and electric cooperatives, unit power sales contracts, and short-term opportunity sales. Short-term opportunity sales are made at market-based rates that generally provide a margin above the Company’s variable cost to produce the energy.
In 2009, wholesale revenues decreased $598 million. Wholesale fuel revenues, which are generally offset by wholesale fuel expenses and do not affect net income, decreased $603 million in 2009. Excluding wholesale fuel revenues, wholesale revenues increased $5 million primarily due to additional revenues associated with a new PPA at Southern Company’s average wholesale contract extends more than 14 yearsPower’s Plant Franklin Unit 3 which began in January 2009, partially offset by fewer short-term opportunity sales due to lower gas prices and as a result, the Company has significantly limited its remarketing risk.reduced margins on short-term opportunity sales.
In 2008, wholesale revenues increased $412 million primarily as a result of a 21.8% increase in the average cost of fuel per net kilowatt-hour (KWH)KWH generated, as well as revenues resulting from new and existing PPAs and revenues derived from contracts for Southern Power’s Plant Oleander Unit 5 and Plant Franklin Unit 3 placed in operation in December 2007 and June 2008, respectively. The 2008 increase was partially offset by a decrease in short-term opportunity sales and weather-related generation load reductions.
In 2007, wholesale revenues increased $166 million primarily as a result of a 9.9%9.5% increase in the average cost of fuel per net KWH generated. Excluding fuel, wholesale revenues were flat when compared to the prior year.
In 2006, wholesale revenues increased $155 million primarily as a result of a 10.0% increase in the average cost of fuel per net KWH generated, as well as revenues resulting from new PPAs in 2006. In addition, Southern Company assumed four PPAs through the acquisitions of Plants DeSoto and Rowan in June and September 2006, respectively. The 2006 increase was partially offset by a decrease in short-term opportunity sales.
Revenues associated with PPAs and opportunity sales were as follows:
            
             2009 2008 2007 
 2008 2007 2006 
 (in millions)  (in millions) 
Other power sales —  
Capacity and other $538 $533 $499  $575 $538 $533 
Energy 1,319 989 841  735 1,319 989 
Total $1,857 $1,522 $1,340  $1,310 $1,857 $1,522 

II-15II-14


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
Capacity revenues under unit power sales contracts, principally sales to Florida utilities, reflect the recovery of fixed costs and a return on investment. Unit power KWH sales decreased 7.5%, 2.1% in 2008, decreased, and 0.8% in 2009, 2008, and 2007, and increased 0.2% in 2006.respectively. Fluctuations in oil and natural gas prices, which are the primary fuel sources for unit power sales customers,contracts, influence changes in these sales. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “PSC Matters – Alabama Power” herein for additional information regarding the termination of certain unit power sales contracts in 2010. However, because the energy is generally sold at variable cost, these fluctuations have a minimal effect on earnings. The capacity and energy components of the unit power sales contracts were as follows:
            
             2009 2008 2007
 2008 2007 2006
 (in millions) (in millions) 
Unit power sales —  
Capacity $223 $202 $208  $225 $223 $202 
Energy 320 264 274  267 320 264 
Total $543 $466 $482  $492 $543 $466 
Energy Sales
Changes in revenues are influenced heavily by the change in the volume of energy sold from year to year. KWH sales for 20082009 and the percent change by year were as follows:
                 
  KWHs Percent Change
   
  2008 2008 2007 2006
  (in billions)            
Residential  52.3   (2.0)%  1.8%  2.5%
Commercial  54.4   (0.4)  3.2   2.2 
Industrial  52.7   (3.7)  (0.7)  (0.2)
Other  0.9   (2.9)  4.4   (7.6)
 
Total retail  160.3   (2.1)  1.4   1.4 
Wholesale  39.3   (3.4)  5.9   3.7 
 
Total energy sales  199.6   (2.3)  2.3   1.9 
 
KWH sales by quarter for 2008 compared to the same periods in 2007 were as follows:
                         
  KWHs Percent Change
   
          Total         Total
Quarter Ended Retail Wholesale Energy Sales Retail Wholesale Energy Sales
  (in millions)            
March 2008
  38,576   9,590   48,166   1.4%  (1.9)%  0.7%
June 2008
  39,882   10,049   49,931   (1.2)  1.0   (0.7)
September 2008
  45,800   10,969   56,769   (4.6)  (2.2)  (4.1)
December 2008
  36,001   8,760   44,761   (3.3)  (10.6)  (4.8)
                 
  KWHs  Percent Change 
   
  2009  2009  2008  2007 
 
  (in billions) 
Residential  51.7   (1.1)%  (2.0)%  1.8%
Commercial  53.5   (1.7)  (0.4)  3.2 
Industrial  46.4   (11.8)  (3.7)  (0.7)
Other  1.0   2.0   (2.9)  4.4 
 
Total retail  152.6   (4.8)  (2.1)  1.4 
Wholesale  33.5   (14.9)  (3.4)  5.9 
 
Total energy sales  186.1   (6.8)  (2.3)  2.3 
 
Changes in retail energy sales are comprised of changes in electricity usage by customers, changes in weather, and changes in the number of customers. Retail energy sales decreased 7.7 billion KWHs in 2009 primarily as a result of lower usage by industrial customers due to the recessionary economy. Reduced demand in the primary metal, chemical, and textile sectors, as well as the stone, clay, and glass sector, contributed most significantly to the decrease in industrial KWH sales. Unfavorable weather also contributed to lower KWH sales across all customer classes. The number of customers in 2009 was flat compared to 2008. Retail energy sales in 2008 decreased 3.4 billion KWHs as a result of a 1.4% decrease in electricity usage mainly due to a slowing economy that worsened during the fourth quarter. The 2008 decrease in residential sales resulted primarily from lower home occupancy rates in Southern Company’s service area when compared to 2007. Throughout the year, reduced demand in the textile sector;sector, the lumber sector;sector, and the stone, clay, and glass sector contributed to the decrease in 2008 industrial sales. Additional weakness in the fourth quarter 2008 affected all major industrial segments. Significantly less favorable weather in 2008 when compared to

II-16


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
2007 also contributed to the 2008 decrease in retail energy sales. These decreases were partially offset by customer growth of 0.6%. Retail energy sales in 2007 increased 2.3 billion KWHs as a result of 1.3% customer growth and favorable weather in 2007 when compared to 2006. The 2007 decrease in industrial sales primarily resulted from reduced demand and closures within the textile sector, as well as decreased demand in the primary metals sector and the stone, clay, and glass sector. Retail energy sales in 2006 increased 2.3 billion KWHs as a result of customer growth of 1.7%, sustained economic growth primarily in the residential and commercial customer classes, and favorable weather in 2006 when compared to 2005.
Wholesale energy sales decreased by 5.9 billion KWHs in 2009, decreased by 1.4 billion KWHs in 2008, and increased by 2.3 billion KWHs in 2007,2007. The decrease in wholesale energy sales in 2009 was primarily related to fewer short-term opportunity sales driven by lower gas prices and increased by 1.4 billion KWHs in 2006.fewer uncontracted generating units at Southern Power available to sell electricity on the wholesale market. The decrease in wholesale energy sales in 2008 was primarily related to longer planned maintenance outages at a fossil unit in 2008 as compared to 2007 which reduced the availability of this unit for wholesale sales. Lower short-term opportunity sales primarily related to higher coal prices also contributed to the 2008 decrease. These decreases were partially offset by Plant Oleander Unit 5 and Plant Franklin Unit 3 being placed in operation in December 2007 and June 2008, respectively. The increase in wholesale energy sales in 2007 was primarily related to new PPAs acquired by Southern Company through the acquisition of Plant Rowan in September 2006, as well as new contracts with EnergyUnited Electric Membership Corporation that commenced in September 2006 and January 2007. An increase in KWH sales under existing PPAs also contributed to the 2007 increase. The increase in wholesale energy sales in 2006 was related primarily to the new PPAs discussed previously under “Electric Operating Revenues.”

II-15


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Fuel and Purchased Power Expenses
Fuel costs constitute the single largest expense for the electric utilities. The mix of fuel sources for generation of electricity is determined primarily by demand, the unit cost of fuel consumed, and the availability of generating units. Additionally, the electric utilities purchase a portion of their electricity needs from the wholesale market. Details of Southern Company’s electricity generated and purchased by the electric utilities were as follows:
            
             2009 2008 2007 
 2008 2007 2006
Total generation(billions of KWHs)
 198 206 201  187 198 206 
Total purchased power(billions of KWHs)
 11 8 8  8 11 8 
Sources of generation(percent)
  
Coal 68 70 70  57 68 70 
Nuclear 15 14 15  16 15 14 
Gas 16 15 13  23 16 15 
Hydro 1 1 2  4 1 1 
Cost of fuel, generated(cents per net KWH)
  
Coal 3.27 2.60 2.40  3.70 3.27 2.61 
Nuclear 0.50 0.50 0.47  0.55 0.50 0.50 
Gas 7.58 6.64 6.63  4.58 7.58 6.64 
Average cost of fuel, generated(cents per net KWH)
 3.52 2.89 2.63 
Average cost of fuel, generated(cents per net KWH)*
 3.38 3.52 2.89 
Average cost of purchased power(cents per net KWH)
 7.85 7.20 6.82  6.37 7.85 7.20 
*Fuel includes fuel purchased by the Company for tolling agreements where power is generated by the provider and is included in purchased power when determining the average cost of purchased power.
In 2009, fuel and purchased power expenses were $6.4 billion, a decrease of $1.2 billion or 15.8% below 2008 costs. This decrease was primarily the result of an $839 million decrease related to the total KWHs generated and purchased due primarily to lower customer demand. Also contributing to this decrease was a $367 million reduction in the average cost of fuel and purchased power resulting primarily from a 39.6% decrease in the cost of gas per KWH generated.
In 2008, fuel and purchased power expenses were $7.6 billion, an increase of $1.3 billion or 20.0% above 2007 costs. This increase was primarily the result of a $1.3 billion net increase in the average cost of fuel and purchased power partially resulting from a 25.8%25.3% increase in the cost of coal per net KWH generated and a 14.2% increase in the cost of gas per net KWH generated.
In 2007, fuel and purchased power expenses were $6.4 billion, an increase of $673 million or 11.8% above 2006 costs. This increase was primarily the result of a $543 million net increase in the average cost of fuel and purchased power partially resulting from a 51.4% decrease in hydro generation as a result of a severe drought. Also contributing to this increase was a $130 million increase related to higher net KWHs generated and purchased.

II-17


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
In 2006, fuel and purchased power expenses were $5.7 billion, an increase of $467 million or 8.9% above the prior year costs. This increase was primarily the result of a $367 million net increase in the average cost of fuel and purchased power and a $100 million increase relatedCoal prices continued to higher net KWHs generated and purchased.
Over the last several years, coal prices have beenbe influenced by a worldwide increase in demand from developing countries, as well as increases inincreased mining and fuel transportation costs. In the first half of 2008,While coal prices reached unprecedented high levels primarily due to increased demand following more moderate pricing in 20062008, the recessionary economy pushed prices downward in 2009. However, the lower prices did not fully offset the higher priced coal already in inventory and 2007. Despite these fluctuations, fuel inventories have been adequate and fuel supply markets have been sufficient to meet expected fuel requirements.under long-term contract. Demand for natural gas in the United States also increased in 2007 andwas affected by the first half of 2008. However,recessionary economy leading to significantly lower natural gas supplies increased in the last half of 2008 as a result of increased production and higher storage levels due in part to weak industrial demand. Both coal and natural gas prices moderated in the second half of 2008 as the result of a recessionary economy.prices. During 2008,2009, uranium prices continued to moderate from the highs set during 2007. While worldwide uraniumWorldwide production levels appear to have increased slightly since 2007,in 2009; however, secondary supplies and inventories were still required to meet worldwide reactor demand.
Fuel expenses generally do not affect net income, since they are offset by fuel revenues under the traditional operating companies’ fuel cost recovery provisions. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “PSC Matters –Fuel– Fuel Cost Recovery” herein for additional information. Likewise, Southern Power’s PPAs generally provide that the purchasers are responsible for substantially all of the cost of fuel.
Other Operations and Maintenance Expenses
Other operations and maintenance expenses were $3.4 billion, $3.6 billion, and $3.5 billion, and $3.3 billion,decreasing $183 million, increasing $111 million, and increasing $183 million in 2009, 2008, and $70 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Discussion of significant variances for components of other operations and maintenance expenses follows.

II-16


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Other production expenses at fossil, hydro, and nuclear plants decreased $70 million, increased $63 million, and increased $128 million in 2009, 2008, and $3 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Production expenses fluctuate from year to year due to variations in outage schedules and normal increaseschanges in the cost of labor and materials. Other production costs decreased in 2009 mainly due to a $104 million decrease related to less planned spending on outages and maintenance, as well as other cost containment activities, which were the results of efforts to offset the effects of the recessionary economy. The 2009 decrease was partially offset by a $6 million increase related to new facilities, a $5 million loss on the transfer of Southern Power’s Plant Desoto in 2009, a $6 million gain recognized in 2008 by Southern Power on the sale of an undeveloped tract of land to the Orlando Utilities Commission (OUC), and a $17 million increase in nuclear refueling costs. See Note 1 to the financial statements under “Property, Plant, and Equipment” for additional information regarding nuclear refueling costs. Other production expenses increased in 2008 primarily due to a $64 million increase related to expenses incurred for maintenance outages at generating units and a $30 million increase related to labor and materials expenses, partially offset by a $15 million decrease in nuclear refueling costs. See Note 1 to the financial statements under “Property, Plant, and Equipment” for additional information regarding nuclear refueling costs. The 2008 increase was also partially offset by a $24 million decrease related to new facilities, mainly lower costs associated with the 2007 write-off of Southern Power’s integrated coal gasification combined cycle (IGCC) project with the Orlando Utilities Commission.OUC. Other production expenses increased in 2007 primarily due to a $40 million increase related to expenses incurred for maintenance outages at generating units and a $29 million increase related to new facilities, mainly costs associated with the write-off of Southern Power’s IGCC project and the acquisitions of Plants DeSoto and Rowan by Southern Power in June and September 2006, respectively. A $25 million increase related to labor and materials expenses and a $22 million increase in nuclear refueling costs also contributed to the 2007 increase. The 2006 increase in other production expenses when compared to the prior year was not material.
Transmission and distribution expenses decreased $41 million, increased $4 million, and increased $21 million in 2009, 2008, and $30 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Transmission and distribution expenses fluctuate from year to year due to variations in maintenance schedules and normal increaseschanges in costs.the cost of labor and materials. Transmission and distribution expenses decreased in 2009 primarily related to lower planned spending, as well as other cost containment activities. The 2008 increase in transmission and distribution expenses was not material when compared to the prior year. Transmission and distribution expenses increased in 2007 primarily as a result of increases in labor and materials costs and maintenance associated with additional investment to meet customer growth. Transmission and distribution expenses increased in 2006 primarily due to expenses associated

II-18


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
with recovery of prior year storm costs through natural disaster recovery clauses in accordance with an accounting order approved by the Alabama PSC and maintenance associated with additional investment in distribution to meet customer growth.
Customer sales and service expenses decreased $42 million, increased $32 million, and increased $7 million in 2009, 2008, and $9 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Customer sales and service expenses increaseddecreased in 20082009 primarily as a result of a $12 million decrease in customer service expenses, an $8 million decrease in meter reading expenses, a $10 million decrease in sales expenses, and a $7 million decrease in customer records related expenses. The 2008 increase in customer sales and service expenses was primarily a result of an increase in customer accountservice expenses, including a $13 million increase in uncollectible accounts expense, a $9 million increase in meter reading and related supervision expenses, and an $8 million increase for customer records and collections. The 2007 and 2006 increasesincrease in customer sales and service expenses werewas not material when compared to the prior years.year.
Administrative and general expenses decreased $30 million, increased $10 million, $28$12 million, and $29increased $27 million in 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively. The 2009 decrease in administrative and 2006, respectively.general expenses was primarily the result of cost containment activities which were the results of efforts to offset the effects of the recessionary economy. The 2008 increase in administrative and general expenses was not material when compared to the prior year.2007. Administrative and general expenses increased in 2007 primarily as a result of a $16 million increase in legal costs and expenses associated with an increase in employees. Also contributing to the 2007 increase was a $14 million increase in accrued expenses for the litigation and workers’ compensation reserve, partially offset by an $8 million decrease in property damage expense. Administrative
Depreciation and general expensesAmortization
Depreciation and amortization increased $62 million in 20062009 primarily as a result of a $17 millionan increase in salariesplant in service related to environmental, transmission, and wagesdistribution projects mainly at Alabama Power and a $24 millionGeorgia Power and the completion of Southern Power’s Plant Franklin Unit 3, as well as an increase in pension expense, partially offsetdepreciation rates at Southern Power. Partially offsetting the 2009 increase was a decrease associated with the amortization of the regulatory liability related to the cost of removal obligations as authorized by a $16 million reduction in medical expenses.
Depreciation and Amortizationthe Georgia PSC. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters – Georgia Power – Cost of Removal” for additional information regarding Georgia Power’s cost of removal amortization.
Depreciation and amortization increased $199 million in 2008 primarily as a result of an increase in plant in service related to environmental, transmission, and distribution projects mainly at Alabama Power and Georgia Power and generation projects at Georgia Power. An increase in depreciation rates at Georgia Power and Southern Power also contributed to the 2008 increase, as well as the expiration of a rate order previously allowing Georgia Power to levelize certain purchased power capacity costs and the completion of Plant Oleander Unit 5 in December 2007 and Plant Franklin Unit 3 in June 2008.

II-17


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Depreciation and amortization increased $51 million in 2007 primarily as a result of an increase in plant in service related to environmental, transmission, and distribution projects mainly at Alabama Power and Georgia Power. An increase in the amortization expense of a regulatory liability recorded in 2003 in connection with the Mississippi PSC’s accounting order on Plant Daniel capacity also contributed to the 2007 increase. Partially offsetting the 2007 increase was a reduction in amortization expense due to a Georgia Power regulatory liability related to the levelization of certain purchased power capacity costs as ordered by the Georgia PSC under the terms of the retail rate order effective January 1, 2005. See Note 1 to the financial statements under “Depreciation and Amortization” for additional information.
Depreciation and amortization increased $27 million in 2006 primarily as a result of the acquisitions of Plants DeSoto, Rowan, and Oleander in June 2006, September 2006, and June 2005, respectively, and an increase in the amortization expense of the Mississippi Power regulatory liability related to Plant Daniel capacity. An increase in depreciation rates at Southern Power also contributed to the 2006 increase. Partially offsetting the 2006 increase was a reduction in the amortization expense of a Georgia Power regulatory liability related to the levelization of certain purchased power capacity costs.
Taxes Other Than Income Taxes
Taxes other than income taxes increased $22 million in 2009 primarily as a result of increases in the bases of state and municipal public utility license taxes at Alabama Power and an increase in franchise fees at Gulf Power. Increases in franchise fees are associated with increases in revenues from energy sales. Taxes other than income taxes increased $56 million in 2008 primarily as a result of increases in franchise fees and municipal gross receipt taxes associated with increases in revenues from energy sales, as well as increases in property taxes associated with property tax actualizations and additional plant in service. Taxes other than income taxes increased $23 million in 2007 primarily as a result of increases in franchise and municipal gross receipts taxes

II-19


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
associated with increases in revenues from energy sales, partially offset by a decrease in property taxes resulting from the resolution of a dispute with Monroe County, Georgia. Taxes other than income taxes increased $39 million in 2006 primarily as a result of increases in franchise and municipal gross receipts taxes associated with increases in revenues from energy sales, as well as increases in property taxes associated with additional plant in service.
Other Income (Expense), Net
Other income (expense), net increased $24$53 million in 2009 primarily due to an increase in AFUDC equity as a result of environmental projects at Alabama Power and Gulf Power and additional investments in transmission and distribution projects at Alabama Power. In addition, during 2009, Southern Power recognized a $13 million profit under a construction contract with the OUC whereby Southern Power provided engineering, procurement, and construction services to build a combined cycle unit. Other income (expense), net increased $26 million in 2008 primarily as a result of an increase in allowance forAFUDC equity funds used during construction related to additional investments in environmental equipment at generating plants at Alabama Power, Georgia Power, and Gulf Power, as well as additional investments in transmission and distribution projects mainly at Alabama Power and Georgia Power. Other income (expense), net increased $68$66 million in 2007 primarily as a result of an increase in allowance forAFUDC equity funds used during construction related to additional investments in environmental equipment at generating plants and transmission and distribution projects mainly at Alabama Power and Georgia Power. The 2006 decrease in other income (expense), net when compared to the prior year was not material.
Interest Expense, and DividendsNet of Amounts Capitalized
Total interest charges and other financing costs increased by $25$61 million in 2009 primarily as a result of a $100 million increase associated with $1.4 billion in additional debt outstanding at December 31, 2009 compared to December 31, 2008. Also contributing to the 2009 increase was $16 million in other interest costs. The 2009 increase was partially offset by $42 million related to lower average interest rates on existing variable rate debt and $13 million of additional capitalized interest as compared to 2008.
Total interest charges and other financing costs increased by $10 million in 2008 primarily as a result of an $82a $65 million increase associated with $1.7$1.8 billion in additional debt and preference stock outstanding at December 31, 2008 compared to December 31, 2007. Also contributing to the 2008 increase was $5 million in other interest costs. The 2008 increase was partially offset by $55 million related to lower average interest rates on existing variable rate debt and $7 million of additional capitalized interest as compared to 2007.
Total interest charges and other financing costs increased by $61$46 million in 2007 primarily as a result of a $72$59 million increase associated with $1.2 billion$703 million in additional debt and preference stock outstanding at December 31, 2007 compared to December 31, 2006 and higher interest rates associated with the issuance of new long-term debt. Also contributing to the 2007 increase was $7 million related to higher average interest rates on existing variable rate debt and $19 million in other interest costs. The 2007 increase was partially offset by $38 million of additional capitalized interest as compared to 2006.
Total interest charges and other financing costs increased by $75Income Taxes
Income taxes decreased $49 million in 20062009 primarily due to a $78 million increase associated with $708 million in additional debt outstanding at December 31, 2006lower pre-tax earnings as compared to December 31, 20052008, an increase in AFUDC equity, which is not taxable, and higher interest rates associated withan increase in the issuanceInternal Revenue Code of new long-term debt. Also contributing1986, as amended (Internal Revenue Code), Section 199 production activities deduction. See Note 5 to the 2006 increase was $7 million associated with higher average interest rates on existing variable rate debt, partially offset by $6 million offinancial statements under “Effective Tax Rate” for additional capitalized interest associated with construction projectsinformation.

II-18


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and $3 million in lower other interest costs.
Income TaxesSubsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Income taxes increased $87 million in 2008 primarily due to higher pre-tax earnings as compared to 2007 and a 2007 deduction for a Georgia Power land donation. The 2008 increase was partially offset by an increase in allowance forAFUDC equity, funds used during construction, which is not taxable. See Note 5 to the financial statements under “Effective Tax Rate” for additional information.
Income taxes were relatively flat in 2007 as higher pre-tax earnings as compared to 2006 were largely offset due to a deduction for a Georgia Power land donation; an increase in allowance forAFUDC equity, funds used during construction, which is not taxable; and an increase in the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Internal Revenue Code), Section 199 production activities deduction.

II-20


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern CompanyDividends on Preferred and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual ReportPreference Stock of Subsidiaries
Income taxesDividends on preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries for 2009 were flat compared to the prior year.
Dividends on preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries increased $50$17 million in 20062008 primarily due to higher pre-tax earnings as a result of issuances of $320 million and $150 million of preference stock in the third and fourth quarters of 2007, respectively, partially offset by the redemption of $125 million of preferred stock in January 2008.
Dividends on preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries increased $13 million in 2007 primarily as a result of a $470 million increase associated with additional preference stock outstanding at December 31, 2007 compared to 2005 and the impact of a 2005 accounting order approved by the Alabama PSC to return certain regulatory liabilities related to deferred taxes to Alabama Power’s retail customers.December 31, 2006.
Other Business Activities
Southern Company’s other business activities include the parent company (which does not allocate operating expenses to business units), investments in leveraged lease projects, and telecommunications. Southern Company’s investment in synthetic fuel projects telecommunications, and energy-related services.ended at December 31, 2007. These businesses are classified in general categories and may comprise one or more of the following subsidiaries: Southern Company Holdings invests in various energy-related projects, including leveraged lease and synthetic fuel projects that receive tax benefits, which have contributed significantly to the economic results of these investments;projects; SouthernLINC Wireless provides digital wireless communications for use by Southern Company and its subsidiary companies and also markets these services to the public and provides fiber cable services within the Southeast.
Southern Company’s investment in synthetic fuel projects ended at December 31, 2007. A condensed statement of income for Southern Company’s other business activities follows:
                
 Increase (Decrease)
                 Amount from Prior Year
 Increase (Decrease)
 Amount from Prior Year 2009 2009 2008 2007
 2008 2008 2007 2006
 (in millions)  (in millions)
Operating revenues $127 $(86) $(55) $(8) $101 $(26) $(86) $(55)
Other operations and maintenance 165  (44)  (29)  (59) 125  (40)  (44)  (29)
MC Asset Recovery litigation settlement 202 202   
Depreciation and amortization 29  (1)  (6)  (3) 27  (2)  (1)  (6)
Taxes other than income taxes 3    (1) 2  (1)   
Total operating expenses 197  (45)  (35)  (63) 356 159  (45)  (35)
Operating income (loss)  (70)  (41)  (20) 55   (255)  (185)  (41)  (20)
Equity in income (losses) of unconsolidated subsidiaries 10 35 35 62   (1)  (11) 35 35 
Leveraged lease income (losses)  (85)  (125)  (29)  (5) 40 125  (125)  (29)
Other income (expense), net 12  (29) 73  (19) 3  (8)  (31) 74 
Interest expense 94  (28)  (27) 48  71  (22)  (30)  (26)
Income taxes  (122)  (7) 53 136   (92) 30  (7) 53 
Net income (loss) $(105) $(125) $33 $(91) $(192) $(87) $(125) $33 
Operating Revenues
Southern Company’s non-electric operating revenues from these other businesses decreased $86$26 million in 20082009 primarily as a result of a $25 million decrease in revenues at SouthernLINC Wireless related to lower average revenue per subscriber and fewer subscribers due to increased competition in the industry. The $86 million decrease in 2008 primarily resulted from a $60 million decrease associated with Southern Company terminating its investment in synthetic fuel projects at December 31, 2007 and a $21 million decrease in revenues at SouthernLINC Wireless related to lower average revenue per subscriber and fewer subscribers due to

II-19


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
increased competition in the industry. Also contributing to the 2008 decrease was a $5 million decrease in revenues from Southern Company’s energy-related services business. The $55 million decrease in 2007 primarily resulted from a $14 million decrease in fuel procurement service revenues following a contract termination, a $13 million decrease in revenues at SouthernLINC Wireless related to lower average revenue per subscriber and fewer subscribers due to increased competition in the industry, and an $11 million decrease in revenues from Southern Company’s energy-related services business. The $8 million decrease in 2006 primarily resulted from a $21 million decrease in revenues at SouthernLINC Wireless related to lower average revenue per subscriber and lower equipment and accessory sales. The 2006 decrease was partially offset by a $12 million increase in fuel procurement service revenues.

II-21


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Other Operations and Maintenance Expenses
Other operations and maintenance expenses for these other businesses decreased $40 million in 2009 primarily as a result of a $15 million decrease in salary and wages, advertising, equipment, and network costs at SouthernLINC Wireless; a $10 million decrease in expenses associated with leveraged lease litigation costs; and a $6 million decrease in parent company expenses associated with the MC Asset Recovery litigation. Other operations and maintenance expenses decreased $44 million in 2008 primarily as a result of $11 million of lower coal expenses related to Southern Company terminating its investment in synthetic fuel projects at December 31, 2007; $9 million of lower sales expenses at SouthernLINC Wireless related to lower sales volume; and $5 million of lower parent company expenses related to advertising, litigation, and property insurance costs. Other operations and maintenance expenses decreased $29 million in 2007 primarily as a result of $11 million of lower production expenses related to the termination of Southern Company’s membership interest in one of the synthetic fuel entities and $8 million attributed to the wind-down of one of the Company’s energy-related services businesses. Other operations
MC Asset Recovery Litigation Settlement
On March 31, 2009, Southern Company entered into a litigation settlement agreement with MC Asset Recovery which resulted in a charge of $202 million and maintenance expenses decreased $59 millionrequires MC Asset Recovery to release Southern Company and certain other designated avoidance actions assigned to MC Asset Recovery in 2006 primarilyconnection with Mirant’s plan of reorganization, as a resultwell as to release all actions against current or former officers and directors of $32 million of lower production expenses relatedMirant and Southern Company that have or could have been filed. Pursuant to the terminationsettlement, Southern Company recorded a charge in the first quarter 2009 of $202 million, which was paid in the second quarter 2009. The settlement has been completed and resolves all claims by MC Asset Recovery against Southern Company’s membership interest in one ofCompany. On June 29, 2009, the synthetic fuel entities, $13 million attributed to the wind-down of one of the Company’s energy-related services businesses, and $7 million of lower expenses resulting from the March 2006 sale of a subsidiary that provided rail car maintenance services.case was dismissed with prejudice.
Equity in Income (Losses) of Unconsolidated Subsidiaries
Southern Company made investments in two synthetic fuel production facilities that generated operating losses. These investments allowed Southern Company to claim federal income tax credits that offset these operating losses and made the projects profitable. Equity in income (losses) of unconsolidated subsidiaries decreased $11 million in 2009 as a result of an $11 million gain recognized in 2008 related to the dissolution of a partnership that was associated with these synthetic fuel production facilities. Equity in income (losses) of unconsolidated subsidiaries increased $35 million in 2008 primarily as a result of Southern Company terminating its investment in synthetic fuel projects at December 31, 2007. Equity in lossesincome (losses) of unconsolidated subsidiaries decreasedincreased $35 million in 2007 primarily as a result of terminating Southern Company’s membership interest in one of the synthetic fuel entities which reduced the amount of the Company’s share of the losses and, therefore, the funding obligation for the year. Also contributing to the 2007 decrease were adjustments to the phase-out of the related federal income tax credits, partially offset by higher operating expenses due to idled production in 2006 and decreased production in 2007 in anticipation of exiting the business. Equity in losses of unconsolidated subsidiaries decreased $62 million in 2006 as a result of terminating Southern Company’s membership interest in one of the synthetic fuel entities which reduced the amount of the Company’s share of the losses and, therefore, the funding obligation for the year. The 2006 decrease also resulted from lower operating expenses while the production facilities at the other synthetic fuel entity were idled from May to September 2006 due to higher oil prices.
Leveraged Lease Income (Losses)
Southern Company has several leveraged lease agreements which relate to international and domestic energy generation, distribution, and transportation assets. Southern Company receives federal income tax deductions for depreciation and amortization, as well as interest on long-term debt related to these investments. Leveraged lease lossesincome (losses) increased $125 million in 2009 primarily as a result of the application in 2008 of certain accounting standards related to leveraged leases, as well as a $26 million gain recorded in the second quarter 2009 associated with the early termination of two international leveraged lease investments. The proceeds from the termination were required to be used to extinguish all debt related to leveraged lease investments, a portion of which had make-whole redemption provisions. This resulted in a $17 million loss and partially offset the 2009 increase. Leveraged lease income (losses) decreased $125 million in 2008 as a result of Southern Company’s decision to participate in a settlement with the IRSInternal Revenue Service (IRS) related to deductions for several sale-in-lease-out (SILO) transactions and the resulting application of Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Staff Position No. FAS 13-2, “Accounting for a Change or Projected Change in the Timing of Cash Flows Relatingcertain accounting standards related to Income Taxes Generated by a Leveraged Lease Transaction” (FSP 13-2). See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Income Tax Matters — Leveraged Leases” for further information.leveraged leases. Leveraged lease income (losses) decreased $29 million in 2007 as a result of the adoption of FSP 13-2,certain accounting standards related to leveraged leases, as well as an expected decline in leveraged lease income over the terms of the leases. The 2006 decrease in leveraged lease income when compared to the prior year was not material.

II-22II-20


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
Other Income (Expense), Net
OtherThe 2009 change in other income (expense), net for these other businesses when compared to the prior year was not material. Other income (expense), net decreased $29$31 million in 2008 primarily as a result of the 2007 gain on a derivative transaction in the synthetic fuel business which settled on December 31, 2007. Other income (expense), net increased $73$74 million in 2007 primarily as a result of a $60 million increase related to changes in the value of derivative transactions in the synthetic fuel business and a $16 million increase related to the 2006 impairment of investments in the synthetic fuel entities, partially offset by the release of $6 million in certain contractual obligations associated with these investments in 2006. Other income (expense), net decreased $19 million in 2006 primarily as a result of a $25 million decrease related to changes in the value of derivative transactions in the synthetic fuel business and the previously mentioned impairment and release of contractual obligations.
Interest Expense
Total interest charges and other financing costs for these other businesses decreased $28$22 million in 2009 primarily as a result of $26 million associated with lower average interest rates on existing variable rate debt and a $2 million decrease attributed to other interest charges. The 2009 decrease was partially offset by a $4 million increase associated with $63 million in additional debt outstanding at December 31, 2009 compared to December 31, 2008. Total interest charges and other financing costs decreased $30 million in 2008 primarily as a result of $29 million associated with lower average interest rates on existing variable rate debt and a $4 million decrease attributed to lower interest rates associated with new debt issued to replace maturing securities. At December 31, 2008, these other businesses had $92 million in additional debt outstanding compared to December 31, 2007. The 2008 decrease was partially offset by a $5 million increase in other interest costs. Total interest charges and other financing costs decreased by $27$26 million in 2007 primarily as a result of $16 million of losses on debt that was reacquired in 2006. Also contributing to the 2007 decrease was $97 million less debt outstanding at December 31, 2007 compared to December 31, 2006, lower interest rates associated with the issuance of new long-term debt, and a $4 million decrease in other interest costs. Total interest charges and other financing costs increased by $48 million in 2006 primarily as a result of a $19 million increase associated with $149 million in additional debt outstanding at December 31, 2006 as compared to December 31, 2005 and higher interest rates associated with the issuance of new long-term debt. Also contributing to the increase were $12 million associated with higher average interest rates on existing variable rate debt, a $6 million loss on the early redemption of long-term debt payable to affiliated trusts in January 2006, and a $16 million loss on the repayment of long-term debt payable to affiliated trusts in December 2006. The 2006 increase was partially offset by $4 million in lower other interest costs.
Income Taxes
Income taxes for these other businesses increased $30 million in 2009 excluding the effects of the $202 million charge resulting from the litigation settlement with MC Asset Recovery in the first quarter 2009. The 2009 increase was primarily due to the application in 2008 of certain accounting standards related to leveraged leases and income taxes. Partially offsetting this increase was lower tax expense associated with the early termination of two international leveraged lease investments and the extinguishment of the associated debt discussed previously under “Leveraged Lease Income (Losses).” Income taxes decreased $7 million in 2008 primarily as a result of leveraged lease losses discussed previously under “Leveraged Lease Income (Losses),” partially offset by a $36 million decrease in net synthetic fuel tax credits as a result of Southern Company terminating its investment in synthetic fuel projects at December 31, 2007. Income taxes increased $53 million in 2007 primarily as a result of a $30 million decrease in net synthetic fuel tax credits as a result of terminating Southern Company’s membership interest in one of the synthetic fuel entities in 2006 and increasing the synthetic fuel tax credit reserves due to an anticipated phase-out of synthetic fuel tax credits due to higher oil prices. Income taxes increased $136 million in 2006 primarily as a result of a $111 million decrease in net synthetic fuel tax credits as a result of terminating Southern Company’s membership interest in one of the synthetic fuel entities, curtailing production at the other synthetic fuel entity from May to September 2006, and increasing the synthetic fuel tax credit reserves due to an anticipated phase-out of synthetic fuel tax credits due to higher oil prices. See Note 5 to the financial statements under “Effective Tax Rate” for further information.

II-23


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Effects of Inflation
The traditional operating companies and Southern Power are subject to rate regulation and party to long-term contracts that areis generally based on the recovery of historical and projected costs. When historical costs are included, or when inflation exceeds projected costs used in rate regulation or in market-based prices, theThe effects of inflation can create an economic loss since the recovery of costs could be in dollars that have less purchasing power. In addition, the income tax laws are based on historical costs. While theSouthern Power is party to long-term contracts reflecting market-based rates, including inflation rate has been relatively low in recent years, it continues to have anexpectations. Any adverse effect of inflation on Southern Company becauseCompany’s results of the large investment in utility plant with long economic lives. Conventional accounting for historical cost doesoperations has not recognize this economic loss or the partially offsetting gain that arises through financing facilities with fixed-money obligations such as long-term debt, preferred securities, preferred stock, and preference stock. Any recognition of inflation by regulatory authorities is reflected in the rate of return allowed in the traditional operating companies’ approved electric rates.been substantial.
FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL
General
The four traditional operating companies operate as vertically integrated utilities providing electricity to customers within their service areas in the Southeastern United States. Prices for electricity provided to retail customers are set by state PSCs under cost-based regulatory principles. Prices for wholesale electricity sales, interconnecting transmission lines, and the exchange of electric power are regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Retail rates and earnings are reviewed and may be adjusted periodically within certain limitations. Southern Power continues to focus on long-term capacity contracts, optimized by limited energy trading activities. See ACCOUNTING POLICIES – “Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates – Electric Utility Regulation” herein and Note 3 to the financial statements for additional information about regulatory matters.

II-21


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
The results of operations for the past three years are not necessarily indicative of future earnings potential. The level of Southern Company’s future earnings depends on numerous factors that affect the opportunities, challenges, and risks of Southern Company’s primary business of selling electricity. These factors include the traditional operating companies’ ability to maintain a constructive regulatory environment that continues to allow for the recovery of all prudently incurred costs during a time of increasing costs. Other major factors include the profitability of the competitive wholesale supply business and federal regulatory policy which may impact Southern Company’s level of participation in this market. Southern Company continues to face regulatory challenges related to transmission issues at the national level. Future earnings for the electricity business in the near term will depend, in part, upon maintaining energy sales, during the current economic downturn, which is subject to a number of factors. These factors include weather, competition, new energy contracts with neighboring utilities and other wholesale customers, energy conservation practiced by customers, the price of electricity, the price elasticity of demand, and the rate of economic growth or decline in the service area. In addition, the level of future earnings for the wholesale supply business also depends on numerous factors including creditworthiness of customers, total generating capacity available in the Southeast, future acquisitions and construction of generating facilities, and the successful remarketing of capacity as current contracts expire. Recent recessionaryRecessionary conditions have negatively impacted sales growth for the traditional operating companies, particularly to industrial and maycommercial customers, and have negatively impactimpacted wholesale capacity revenues at Southern Power. The timing and extent of the economic recovery will impact future earnings.
Southern Company system generating capacity increased 659325 megawatts due to Southern Power’s completionacquisition of Franklin Unit 3West Georgia Generating Company, LLC and divestiture of DeSoto County Generating Company, LLC in June 2008.December 2009. In general, Southern Company has constructed or acquired new generating capacity only after entering into long-term capacity contracts for the new facilities or to meet requirements of Southern Company’s regulated retail markets, both of which are optimized by limited energy trading activities. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “Construction Projects”Program” herein and Note 7 to the financial statements for additional information.

II-24


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
As part of its ongoing effort to adapt to changing market conditions, Southern Company continues to evaluate and consider a wide array of potential business strategies. These strategies may include business combinations, partnerships, acquisitions involving other utility or non-utility businesses or properties, disposition of certain assets, internal restructuring, or some combination thereof. Furthermore, Southern Company may engage in new business ventures that arise from competitive and regulatory changes in the utility industry. Pursuit of any of the above strategies, or any combination thereof, may significantly affect the business operations, risks, and financial condition of Southern Company.
Environmental Matters
Compliance costs related to the Clean Air Act and other environmental statutes and regulations could affect earnings if such costs cannot continue to be fully recovered in rates on a timely basis. Environmental compliance spending over the next several years may exceed amounts estimated. Some of the factors driving the potential for such an increase are higher commodity costs, market demand for labor, and scope additions and clarifications. The timing, specific requirements, and estimated costs could also change as environmental statutes and regulations are adopted or modified. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Environmental Matters” for additional information.
New Source Review Actions
In November 1999, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) brought a civil action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, including Alabama Power and Georgia Power, alleging that these subsidiaries had violated the New Source Review (NSR) provisions of the Clean Air Act and related state laws at certain coal-fired generating facilities. Through subsequent amendments and other legal procedures,After Alabama Power was dismissed from the original action, the EPA filed a separate action in January 2001 against Alabama Power in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama after Alabama Power was dismissed from the original action.Alabama. In these lawsuits, the EPA allegedalleges that NSR violations occurred at eight coal-fired generating facilities operated by Alabama Power and Georgia Power, including facilities co-owned by Mississippi Power and Gulf Power. The civil actions request penalties and injunctive relief, including an order requiring the installation of the best available control technology at the affected units. The EPA concurrently issued notices of violation to Gulf Power and Mississippi Power relating to Gulf Power’s Plant Crist and Mississippi Power’s Plant Watson. In early 2000, the EPA filed a motion to amend its complaint to add Gulf Power and Mississippi Power as defendants based on the allegations in the notices of violation. However, in March 2001, the court denied the motion based on lack of jurisdiction, and the EPA has not re-filed. The original action, now solely against Georgia Power, has been administratively closed since the spring of 2001, and the case has not been reopened.

II-22


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
In June 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama entered a consent decree between Alabama Power and the EPA, resolving a portion of the Alabama Power lawsuit relating to the alleged NSR violations at Plant Miller. The consent decree required Alabama Power to pay $100,000 to resolve the government’s claim for a civil penalty and to donate $4.9 million of sulfur dioxide emission allowances to a nonprofit charitable organization. It also formalized specific emissions reductions to be accomplished by Alabama Power, consistent with other Clean Air Act programs that require emissions reductions. In August 2006, the district court in Alabama granted Alabama Power’s motion for summary judgment and entered final judgment in favor of Alabama Power on the EPA’s claims related to all of the remaining plants: Plants Barry, Gaston, Gorgas, and Greene County.
The plaintiffs appealed the district court’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, where the appeal was stayed, pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in a similar case against Duke Energy. The Supreme Court issued its decision in the Duke Energy case in April 2007, and in December 2007, the Eleventh Circuit vacated the district court’s decision in the Alabama Power case and remanded the case back to the district court for consideration of the legal issues in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Duke Energy case. On July 24, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama granted partial summary judgment in favor of Alabama Power with respect to its other affected units regarding the proper legal test for determining whether projects are routine maintenance, repair, and replacement and therefore are excluded from NSR permitting. The decision did not resolve the case, and the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.

II-25


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
which remains ongoing.
Southern Company believes that the traditional operating companies complied with applicable laws and the EPA regulations and interpretations in effect at the time the work in question took place. The Clean Air Act authorizes maximum civil penalties of $25,000 to $37,500 per day, per violation at each generating unit, depending on the date of the alleged violation. An adverse outcome in either of these cases could require substantial capital expenditures or affect the timing of currently budgeted capital expenditures that cannot be determined at this time and could possibly require payment of substantial penalties. Such expenditures could affect future results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.
Carbon Dioxide Litigation
New York Case
In July 2004, three environmental groups and attorneys general from eight states, each outside of Southern Company’s service territory, and the corporation counsel for New York City filed complaints in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against Southern Company and four other electric power companies. The complaints allege that the companies’ emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, contribute to global warming, which the plaintiffs assert is a public nuisance. Under common law public and private nuisance theories, the plaintiffs seek a judicial order (1) holding each defendant jointly and severally liable for creating, contributing to, and/or maintaining global warming and (2) requiring each of the defendants to cap its emissions of carbon dioxide and then reduce those emissions by a specified percentage each year for at least a decade. The plaintiffs have not, however, requested that damages be awarded in connection with their claims. Southern Company believes these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. In September 2005, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted Southern Company’s and the other defendants’ motions to dismiss these cases. The plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in October 2005 but no decision has been issued. Theand, on September 21, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the district court’s ruling, vacating the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claim, and remanding the case to the district court. On November 5, 2009, the defendants, including Southern Company, sought rehearing en banc, and the court’s ruling is subject to potential appeal. Therefore, the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Kivalina Case
OnIn February 26, 2008, the Native Village of Kivalina and the City of Kivalina filed a suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against several electric utilities (including Southern Company), several oil companies, and a coal company. The plaintiffs are the governing bodies of an Inupiat village in Alaska. The plaintiffs contend that the village is being destroyed by erosion allegedly caused by global warming that the plaintiffs attribute to emissions of greenhouse gases by the defendants. The plaintiffs assert claims for public and private nuisance and contend that some of the defendants have acted in concert and are therefore jointly and severally liable for the plaintiffs’ damages. The suit seeks damages for lost property values and for the cost of relocating the village, which is alleged to be $95 million to $400 million. On June 30, 2008, all defendants filed motions to dismiss this case. Southern Company believes that these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. On September 30, 2009, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss the case based on lack of jurisdiction and ruled the claims were barred by the political question doctrine and by the plaintiffs’ failure to establish the standard for determining that the defendants’ conduct caused the injury alleged. On November 5, 2009, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit challenging the district court’s order dismissing the case. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Other Litigation
Common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas emissions have become more frequent, and courts have recently determined that private parties and states have standing to bring such claims. For example, on October 16, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi’s dismissal of private party claims against certain oil, coal, chemical, and utility companies alleging damages as a result of Hurricane Katrina. In reversing the dismissal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that plaintiffs have standing to

II-23


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
assert their nuisance, trespass, and negligence claims and none of these claims are barred by the political question doctrine. The Company is not currently a party to this litigation but the traditional operating companies and Southern Power were named as defendants in an amended complaint which was rendered moot in August 2007 by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi when such court dismissed the original matter. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Environmental Statutes and Regulations
General
Southern Company’sThe electric utilities’ operations are subject to extensive regulation by state and federal environmental agencies under a variety of statutes and regulations governing environmental media, including air, water, and land resources. Applicable statutes include the Clean Air Act; the Clean Water Act; the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; the Toxic Substances Control Act; the Emergency Planning & Community Right-to-Know Act; the Endangered Species Act; and related federal and state regulations. Compliance with these environmental requirements involves significant capital and operating

II-26


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
costs, a major portion of which is expected to be recovered through existing ratemaking provisions. Through 2008, Southern Company2009, the electric utilities had invested approximately $6.3$7.5 billion in capital projects to comply with these requirements, with annual totals of $1.3 billion, $1.6 billion, and $1.5 billion for 2009, 2008, and $661 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. The Company expects that capital expenditures to assure compliance with existing and new statutes and regulations will be an additional $1.4 billion, $737$545 million, $721 million, and $871 million$1.2 billion for 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2011,2012, respectively. The Company’s compliance strategy can be affected by changes to existing environmental laws, statutes, and regulations,regulations; the cost, availability, and existing inventory of emission allowances,emissions allowances; and the Company’s fuel mix. Environmental costs that are known and estimable at this time are included in capital expenditures discussed under FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY — “Capital Requirements and Contractual Obligations” herein.
Compliance with any new federal or state legislation or regulations related to global climate change, air quality, coal combustion byproducts, including coal ash, or other environmental and health concerns could also significantly affect Southern Company. Although new or revised environmental legislation or regulations could affect many areas of Southern Company’s operations, the full impact of any such changes cannot be determined at this time.
Air Quality
Compliance with the Clean Air Act and resulting regulations has been and will continue to be a significant focus for Southern Company. Through 2008,2009, the Company hadelectric utilities have spent approximately $5.4$6.6 billion in reducing sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions and in monitoring emissions pursuant to the Clean Air Act. Additional controls are currently being installed at several plants to further reduce air emissions, maintain compliance with existing regulations, and meet new requirements.
In 2004, theThe EPA designated nonattainment areas underregulates ground level ozone through implementation of an eight-hour ozone air quality standard. AreasA 20-county area within metropolitan Atlanta is the only location within Southern Company’s service area that wereis currently designated as nonattainment under the eight-hour ozone standard included Macon (Georgia), Birmingham (Alabama), and a 20-county area within metropolitan Atlanta. The Macon and Birmingham areas have since been redesignated as attainment areas by the EPA, and maintenance plans to address future exceedances offor the standard, have been approved for both areas. State plans for bringing the Atlanta area into attainment with this standard were due to the EPA in 2007; however, in December 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the EPA rules designed to provide states with the guidance necessary to develop those plans. State planswhich could require additional reductions in NOxemissions from power plants. OnIn March 12, 2008, however, the EPA issued a final rule establishing a more stringent eight-hour ozone standard, which will likelyand on January 6, 2010, the EPA proposed further reductions in the standard. The EPA is expected to finalize the revised standard in August 2010 and require state implementation plans for any nonattainment areas by December 2013. The revised eight-hour ozone standard is expected to result in designation of new nonattainment areas within Southern Company’s service territory. The EPA is expected to publish those designations in 2010 and require state implementation plans for any nonattainment areas by 2013.
During 2005, the EPA’s annual fine particulate matter nonattainment designations became effective for several areas within Southern Company’s service area in Alabama and Georgia. State plans for addressing the nonattainment designations for this standard were due by April 5, 2008 but have not been finalized. These state plans could require further reductions in SO2 and NOx emissions from power plants. In September 2006, the EPA published a final rule which increased the stringency of the 24-hour average fine particulate matter air quality standard. On December 18, 2008, the EPA designated theThe Birmingham, Alabama area has been designated as nonattainment for the 24-hour standard. Astandard, and a state implementation plan for this nonattainment area is due in December 2012.
On December 8, 2009, the EPA also proposed revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for SO2. The EPA issuedis expected to finalize the final Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) in March 2005. This cap-and-trade rule addresses power plantrevised SO2 and NOx emissions that were found to contribute to nonattainment of the eight-hour ozone and fine particulate matter standardsstandard in downwind states. June 2010.
Twenty-eight eastern states, including each of the states within Southern Company’s service area, are subject to the requirements of the rule.Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). The rule calls for additional

II-27


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
reductions of NOx and/or SO2 to be achieved in two phases, 2009/2010 and 2015. OnIn July 11, 2008 in response to petitions brought by certain states and regulated industries challenging particular aspects of CAIR,December 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a decision vacating

II-24


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
decisions invalidating certain aspects of CAIR, in its entirety and remanding it to the EPA for further action consistent with its opinion. On December 23, 2008, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit altered its July decision in response to a rehearing petition and remanded CAIR to the EPA without vacatur, thereby leavingbut left CAIR compliance requirements in place while the EPA develops a revised rule. States in the Southern Company service territory have completed plans to implement CAIR.  EmissionCAIR, and emissions reductions are being accomplished by the installation of emissionemissions controls at Southern Company’s coal-fired facilities of the electric utilities and/or by the purchase of emissionemissions allowances. The full impact of the court’s remand and the outcome of the EPA’s future rulemakingEPA is expected to issue a proposed CAIR replacement rule in response cannot be determined at this time. July 2010.
The Clean Air Visibility Rule (formerly called the Regional Haze Rule) was finalized in July 2005. The2005, with a goal of this rule is to restorerestoring natural visibility conditions in certain areas (primarily national parks and wilderness areas) by 2064. The rule involves (1) the application of Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) to certain sources built between 1962 and 1977, and (2) the application of any additional emissions reductions which may be deemed necessary for each designated area to achieve reasonable progress by 2018 toward the natural conditions goal. Thereafter,goal by 2018 and for each 10-year planningten-year period additional emissions reductions will be required to continue to demonstrate reasonable progress in each area during that period.thereafter. For power plants, the Clean Air Visibility Rule allows states to determine that CAIR satisfies BART requirements for SO2 and NOx. Extensive studies were performed for each of the Company’s affected units to demonstrate that additional particulate matter controls are not necessary under BART. The states of Alabama, and Mississippi have determined that no additional SO2 controls beyond CAIR are neededanticipated to satisfy reasonable progress. At the requestbe necessary at any of the State of Georgia, additional analyses were performed for certain units in Georgia to demonstrate that no additional SO2 controls were required to demonstrate reasonable progress.traditional operating companies’ facilities. States have completed or are currently completing implementation plans that contain strategies for BART compliance and any other measures required to achieve the first phase of reasonable progress.
The EPA is currently developing a Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) rule for coal and oil-fired electric generating units, which will likely address numerous Hazardous Air Pollutants, including mercury. In March 2005, the EPA issued the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), a cap and trade program for the reduction of mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants. In February 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the CAMR. In a separate proceeding in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the EPA entered into a proposed consent decree that requires the EPA to issue a proposed MACT rule by March 16, 2011 and a final rule by November 16, 2011.
In February 2004, the EPA finalized the Industrial Boiler (IB) MACT rule, which imposed limits on hazardous air pollutants from industrial boilers, including biomass boilers. Compliance with the final rule was scheduled to begin in September 2007; however, in response to challenges to the final rule, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the IB MACT rule in its entirety in July 2007 and ordered the EPA to develop a new IB MACT rule. In September 2009, the deadline to promulgate a proposed rule was extended from July 15, 2009 to April 15, 2010, with a final rule required by December 16, 2010. The EPA is currently developing the new rule and may change the methodology to determine the MACT limits for industrial boilers.
The impacts of the eight-hour ozone nonattainment designations,standards, the fine particulate matter nonattainment designations, and future revisions to CAIR, the SO2standard, the Clean Air Visibility Rule, and the MACT rules for electric generating units and industrial boilers on the Company cannot be determined at this time and will depend on the specific provisions of the final rules, resolution of any pending legal challenges, and the development and implementation of rules at the state level. For example, the StateHowever, these additional regulations could result in significant additional compliance costs that could affect future unit retirement and replacement decisions and results of Georgia has approved a “multi-pollutant rule” that requires plant-specific emission controls on all but the smallest generating units in Georgia to be installed according to a schedule set forth in the rule. The rule is designed to ensure reductions in emissions of SO2, NOx,operations, cash flows, and mercury in Georgia.financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.
The Company has developed and continually updates a comprehensive environmental compliance strategy to assess compliance obligations associated with the continuing and new environmental requirements discussed above. As part of this strategy, the Company plans to install additionalhas already installed a number of SO2and NOx emissionemissions controls and plans to install additional controls within the next several years to ensure continued compliance with applicable air quality requirements.
In March 2005, the EPA published the final Clean Air Mercury Rule,addition, most units in Georgia are required to install specific emissions controls according to a cap-and-trade program for the reduction of mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants. The final Clean Air Mercury Rule was challengedschedule set forth in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The petitioners alleged that the EPA was not authorizedstate’s Multipollutant Rule, which is designed to establish a cap-and-trade program for mercuryreduce emissions and instead the EPA must establish maximum achievable control technology standards for coal-fired electric utility steam generating units. On February 8, 2008, the court ruled in favor of the petitioners and vacated the Clean Air Mercury Rule. The Company’s overall environmental compliance strategy relies primarily on a combination of SO2, NOx, and NOx controls to reduce mercury emissions. Any significant changes in the strategy will depend on the outcome of any appeals and/or future federal and state rulemakings. Future rulemakings necessitated by the court’s decision could require emission reductions more stringent than those required by the Clean Air Mercury Rule.

II-28


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Georgia.
Water Quality
In July 2004, the EPA published its final technology-based regulations under the Clean Water Act for the purpose of reducingto reduce impingement and entrainment of fish, shellfish, and other forms of aquatic life at existing power plant cooling water intake structures. The rules require baseline biological information and, perhaps, installation of fish protection technology near some intake structures at existing power plants. In January 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit overturned and remanded several provisions of the rule, including the use of cost-benefit analysis toin the EPA for revisions. The decision has beenrule was ultimately appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. On April 1, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the EPA could consider costs in arriving at its standards and in providing variances from those standards for existing intake structures. The EPA is now in the process of revising the regulations. While the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision may ultimately result in greater flexibility for demonstrating compliance with the standards, the full impactscope of thesethe regulations will depend on subsequent legal proceedings, further rulemaking by the EPA the results of studies and analyses performed as part of the rules’ implementation, and the actual requirements established by state regulatory agencies and, therefore, cannot be determined at this time.
On December 28, 2009, the EPA announced its determination that revision of the current effluent guidelines for steam electric power plants is warranted and proposed a plan to adopt such revisions by 2013. New wastewater treatment requirements are expected and may result in the installation of additional controls on certain Southern Company system facilities. The impact of revised guidelines will depend on the studies conducted in connection with the rulemaking, as well as the specific requirements of the final rule, and, therefore, cannot be determined at this time.

II-25


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Environmental Remediation
Southern Company must comply with other environmental laws and regulations that cover the handling and disposal of waste and releases of hazardous substances. Under these various laws and regulations, the traditional operating companies could incur substantial costs to clean up properties. The traditional operating companies conduct studies to determine the extent of any required cleanup and have recognized in their respective financial statements the costs to clean up known sites. Amounts for cleanup and ongoing monitoring costs were not material for any year presented. The traditional operating companies may be liable for some or all required cleanup costs for additional sites that may require environmental remediation. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Environmental Matters – Environmental Remediation” for additional information.
Global Climate IssuesCoal Combustion Byproducts
Federal legislative proposals that would impose mandatory requirements relatedThe EPA is currently evaluating whether additional regulation of coal combustion byproducts is merited under federal solid and hazardous waste laws. The EPA has collected information from the electric utility industry on surface impoundment safety and conducted on-site inspections at three facilities of Alabama Power and Georgia Power as part of its evaluation. The traditional operating companies have a routine and robust inspection program in place to greenhouse gas emissions and renewable energy standards continueensure the integrity of their respective coal ash surface impoundments. The EPA is expected to be strongly consideredissue a proposal regarding additional regulation of coal combustion byproducts in Congress, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has been identified as a high priority by the current Administration.early 2010. The ultimate outcomeimpact of these proposalsadditional regulations on the Company will depend on the specific provisions of the final rule and cannot be determined at this time; however, mandatory restrictionstime. However, additional regulation of coal combustion byproducts could have a significant impact on the Company’s greenhouse gas emissionstraditional operating companies’ management, beneficial use, and disposal of such byproducts and could result in significant additional compliance costs that could affect future unit retirement and replacement decisions and results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.
Global Climate Issues
Federal legislative proposals that would impose mandatory requirements related to greenhouse gas emissions, renewable energy standards, and energy efficiency standards continue to be considered in Congress, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has been identified as a high priority by the current Administration. On June 26, 2009, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES), which would impose mandatory greenhouse gas restrictions through implementation of a cap and trade program, a renewable energy standard, and other measures, was passed by the House of Representatives. ACES would require reductions of greenhouse gas emissions on a national basis to a level that is 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, 42% below 2005 levels by 2030, and 83% below 2005 levels by 2050. In addition, ACES would provide for renewable energy standards of 6% by 2012 and 20% by 2020. Similar legislation is being considered by the Senate. The financial and operational impact of such legislation, if enacted, will depend on a variety of factors. These factors include the specific greenhouse gas emissions limits or renewable energy requirements, the timing of implementation of these limits or requirements, the level of emissions allowances allocated and the level that must be purchased, the purchase price of emissions allowances, the development and commercial availability of technologies for renewable energy and for the reduction of emissions, the degree to which offsets may be used for compliance, provisions for cost containment (if any), the impact on coal and natural gas prices, and cost recovery through regulated rates. There can be no assurance that any legislation will be enacted or as to the ultimate form of any legislation. Additional or alternative legislation may be adopted as well.
In April 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the EPA has authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles. On December 15, 2009, the EPA published a final determination, which became effective on January 14, 2010, that certain greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles endanger public health and welfare due to climate change. On September 28, 2009, the EPA published a proposed rule regulating greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles under the Clean Air Act. The EPA has stated that once this rule is currently developing its responseeffective, it will cause carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to this decision. Regulatory decisions that will follow from this response may have implicationsbecome regulated pollutants under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) preconstruction permit program and the Title V operating permit program, which both apply to power plants. As a result, the construction of new facilities or the major modification of existing facilities could trigger the requirement for both newa PSD permit and existingthe installation of the best available control technology for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. The EPA also published a proposed rule governing how these programs would be applied to stationary sources, such asincluding power plants.plants, on October 27, 2009. The EPA has stated that it expects to finalize these proposed rules in March 2010. The ultimate outcome of the endangerment finding and these rulemaking activitiesproposed rules cannot be determined at this time; however, as withtime and will depend on additional regulatory action and any legal challenges.
International climate change negotiations under the current legislative proposals,United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change also continue. A nonbinding agreement was announced during the most recent round of negotiations in December 2009 that included a pledge from both developed and developing countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. The outcome and impact of the international negotiations cannot be determined at this time.

II-26


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Although the outcome of federal, state, or international initiatives cannot be determined at this time, mandatory restrictions on the Company’s greenhouse gas emissions couldor requirements relating to renewable energy or energy efficiency on the federal or state level are likely to result in significant additional compliance costs, thatincluding significant capital expenditures. These costs could affect future unit retirement and replacement decisions, and could result in the retirement of a significant number of coal-fired generating units. See Item 1 – BUSINESS – “Rate Matters – Integrated Resource Planning” for additional information. Also, additional compliance costs and costs related to unit retirements could affect results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates. Further, higher costs that are recovered through regulated rates could contribute to reduced demand for electricity, which could negatively impact results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition.
In addition, some states are considering or have undertaken actions to regulate and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For example, on June 25, 2008, Florida’s Governor signed comprehensive energy-related legislation that includes authorization for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to adopt rules for a cap-and-trade regulatory program to address greenhouse gastotal carbon dioxide emissions from the fossil fuel-fired electric generating units owned by the electric utilities conditioned upon their ratification by the legislature no sooner than the 2010 legislative session.  This legislation also authorizes the Florida PSCwere approximately 142 million metric tons. The preliminary estimate of carbon dioxide emissions from these units in 2009 is approximately 121 million metric tons. The level of carbon dioxide emissions from year to adopt a renewable portfolio standard for public utilities, subject to legislative ratification. The impact of this and any similar legislation on Southern Companyyear will dependbe dependent on the future development, adoption, legislative ratification,

II-29


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Companylevel of generation and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
implementation, and potential legal challenges to rules governing greenhouse gas emissions and mandates regardingmix of fuel sources, which is determined primarily by demand, the useunit cost of renewable energy,fuel consumed, and the ultimate outcome cannot be determined at this time.
International climate change negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change also continue. Current efforts focus on a potential successor to the Kyoto Protocol for the post 2012 timeframe, with a conclusion to this roundavailability of negotiations targeted for the end of 2009. The outcome and impact of the international negotiations cannot be determined at this time.generating units.
The Company is actively evaluating and developing electric generating technologies with lower greenhouse gas emissions. These include new nuclear generation, including proposed construction of two additional generating units at Plant Vogtle in Georgia; proposed construction of an advanced IGCC unit with approximately 50%65% carbon capture in Kemper County, Mississippi; and renewables investments, including the proposed conversionconstruction of Plant Mitchella biomass plant in Georgia from coal-fired to biomass generation.Sacul, Texas. The Company is currently considering additional projects and is pursuing research into the costs and viability of other renewable technologies for the Southeast.
FERC Matters
Market-Based Rate Authority
Each of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power has authorization from the FERC to sell power to non-affiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices. Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based contract with an affiliate.
In December 2004, the FERC initiated a proceeding to assess Southern Company’s generation dominance within its retail service territory. The ability to charge market-based rates in other markets is not an issue in the proceeding. Any new market-based rate sales by any subsidiary of Southern Company in Southern Company’s retail service territory entered into during a 15-month refund period that ended in May 2006 could be subject to refund to a cost-based rate level.
In November 2007, the presiding administrative law judge issued an initial decision regarding the methodology to be used in the generation dominance tests. The proceedings are ongoing. The ultimate outcome of this generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined, but an adverse decision by the FERC in a final order could require the traditional operating companies and Southern Power to charge cost-based rates for certain wholesale sales in the Southern Company retail service territory, which may be lower than negotiated market-based rates, and could also result in total refunds of up to $19.7 million, plus interest. Southern Company and its subsidiaries believe that there is no meritorious basis for an adverse decision in this proceeding and are vigorously defending themselves in this matter.
In June 2007, the FERC issued its final rule in Order No. 697 regarding market-based rate authority. The FERC generally retained its current market-based rate standards. Responding to a number of requests for rehearing, the FERC issued Order No. 697-A on April 21, 2008 and Order No. 697-B on December 12, 2008. These orders largely affirmed the FERC’s prior revision and codification of the regulations governing market-based rates for public utilities. In accordance with the orders, Southern Company submitted to the FERC an updated market power analysis on September 2, 2008 related to its continued market-based rate authority. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
On October 17, 2008, Southern Company filed with the FERC a revised market-based rate (MBR) tariff and a new cost-based rate (CBR) tariff.   The revised MBR tariff provides for a “must offer” energy auction whereby Southern Company offers all of its available energy for sale in a day-ahead auction and an hour-ahead auction with reserve prices not to exceed the CBR tariff price, after considering Southern Company’s native load requirements, reliability

II-30


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
obligations, and sales commitments to third parties. All sales under the energy auction would be at market clearing prices established under the auction rules. The new CBR tariff provides for a cost-based price for wholesale sales of less than a year. On December 18, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the MBR tariff subject to certain revisions to the auction proposal. On January 21, 2009, Southern Company made a compliance filing that accepted all the conditions of the MBR tariff order. When this order becomes final, Southern Company will have 30 days to implement the wholesale auction. On December 31, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the CBR tariff subject to providing additional information concerning one aspect of the tariff. On January 30, 2009, Southern Company filed a response addressing the FERC inquiry to the CBR tariff order. Implementation of the energy auction in accordance with the MBR tariff order is expected to adequately mitigate going forward any presumption of market power that Southern Company may have in the Southern Company retail service territory. The timing of when the FERC may issue the final orders on the MBR and CBR tariffs and the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Generation Interconnection Agreements
In November 2004, generator company subsidiaries of Tenaska, Inc. (Tenaska), as counterparties to three previously executed interconnection agreements with subsidiaries of Southern Company, filed complaints at the FERC requesting that the FERC modify the agreements and that those Southern Company subsidiaries refund a total of $19 million previously paid for interconnection facilities. No other similar complaints are pending with the FERC.
In January 2007, the FERC issued an order granting Tenaska’s requested relief. Although the FERC’s order required the modification of Tenaska’s interconnection agreements, under the provisions of the order, Southern Company determined that no refund was payable to Tenaska. Southern Company requested rehearing asserting that the FERC retroactively applied a new principle to existing interconnection agreements. Tenaska requested rehearing of FERC’s methodology for determining the amount of refunds. The requested rehearings were denied, and Southern Company and Tenaska have appealed the orders to the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia. The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
PSC Matters
Alabama Power
Effective January 2007 and thereafter, Rate RSE adjustments are based on forward-looking information for the applicable upcoming calendar year. Retail rateRate adjustments for any two-year period, when averaged together, cannot exceed 4% per year and any annual adjustment is limited to 5%. Retail rates remain unchanged when the retail return on common equity (ROE) is projected to be between 13.0%13% and 14.5%. If Alabama Power’s actual retail ROE is above the allowed equity return range, customer refunds will be required; however, there is no provision for additional customer billings should the actual retail ROE fall below the allowed equity return range.
On October 7, 2008, the Alabama PSC approved a corrective rate package primarily providing for adjustments associated with customer charges to certain existing rate structures. This package, effective in January 2009, is expected to generate additional annual revenues of approximately $168 million. Alabama Power agreed to a moratorium on any increase in 2009 under Rate RSE. Alabama Power also agreed to defer any increase in rates during 2009 under the portion of Rate Certificated New Plant which permits recovery of costs associated with environmental laws and regulations until 2010. The deferral of the retail rate adjustments will have no significant effect on Southern Company’s revenues or net income, but will have an immaterial impact on annual cash flows. On December 1, 2008,2009, Alabama Power made its Rate RSE submission to the Alabama PSC of projected data for calendar year 2010. The Rate RSE increase for 2010 is 3.2%, or $152 million annually, and was effective in January 2010. The revenue adjustment under the Rate RSE is largely attributable to the costs associated with fossil capacity which is currently dedicated to certain long-term wholesale contracts that expire during 2010. Retail cost of service for 2010 reflects the cost for that portion of the year in which this capacity is no longer committed to wholesale. The termination of these long-term wholesale contracts will result in a significant decrease in unit power sales capacity revenues. In an Alabama PSC order dated January 5, 2010, the Alabama PSC acknowledged that a full calendar year of costs for such capacity would be reflected in the Rate RSE calculation beginning in 2011 and thereafter. Under the terms of Rate RSE, the maximum increase for 2011 cannot exceed 4.76%.
The Alabama PSC has also approved a rate mechanism that provides for adjustments to recognize the cost of placing new generating facilities in retail service and for the recovery of retail costs associated with certificated PPAs under a Rate Certificated New Plant (Rate CNP). There was no adjustment to Rate CNP in April 2007, 2008, or 2009. Effective April 2010, Rate CNP will be reduced approximately $70 million annually, primarily due to the expiration on May 31, 2010 of the PPA with Southern Power covering the capacity of Plant Harris Unit 1. Rate CNP also allows for the recovery of Alabama Power’s retail costs associated with environmental laws, regulations, or other such mandates. The rate mechanism is based on forward-looking information and provides for the recovery of these costs pursuant to a factor that is calculated annually. Environmental costs to be recovered include operations and maintenance expenses, depreciation, and a return on invested capital.
On December 1, 2009, Alabama Power made its Rate CNP environmental submission to the Alabama PSC of projected data for calendar year 2010. The Rate CNP environmental increase for 2010 is 4.3%, or $195 million annually, based upon projected billings. Under the terms of the rate mechanism, the adjustment became effective in January 2010. The Rate CNP environmental adjustment is primarily attributable to scrubbers being placed in service during 2010 at four of Alabama Power’s generating plants. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Alabama“Retail Regulatory Matters – Alabama Power Retail Regulatory Matters”Rate Plans” for further information.

II-31II-27


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
Georgia Power
In December 2007, the Georgia PSC approved the retail rate plan for the years 2008 through 2010 (20072007 Retail Rate Plan).Plan. Under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, Georgia Power’s earnings will continue to beare evaluated against a retail ROE range of 10.25% to 12.25%. Two-thirds of any earnings above 12.25% will be applied to rate refunds with the remaining one-third applied to an environmental compliance cost recovery (ECCR) tariff. Georgia Power has agreed that it will not file for a general base rate increase during this period unless its projected retail ROE falls below 10.25%. Retail base rates increased by approximately $99.7$100 million effective January 1, 2008 to provide for cost recovery of transmission, distribution, generation, and other investments, as well as increased operating costs. In addition, the ECCR tariff was implemented to allow for the recovery of costs for requiredrelated to environmental projects mandated by state and federal regulations. The ECCR tariff increased rates by approximately $222 million effective January 1, 2008.
In connection with the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, Georgia Power agreed that it would not file for a general base rate increase during this period unless its projected retail ROE falls below 10.25%. The economic recession has significantly reduced Georgia Power’s revenues upon which retail rates were set under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan. In June 2009, despite stringent efforts to reduce expenses, Georgia Power’s projected retail ROE for both 2009 and 2010 was below 10.25%. However, in lieu of filing to increase customer rates as allowed under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, on June 29, 2009, Georgia Power filed a request with the Georgia PSC for an accounting order that would allow Georgia Power to amortize up to $324 million of its regulatory liability related to other cost of removal obligations.
On August 27, 2009, the Georgia PSC approved the accounting order. Under the terms of the accounting order, Georgia Power was entitled to amortize up to one-third of the regulatory liability ($108 million) in 2009, limited to the amount needed to earn no more than a 9.75% retail ROE. For the year ended December 31, 2009, Georgia Power amortized $41 million of the regulatory liability. In addition, Georgia Power may amortize up to two-thirds of the regulatory liability ($216 million) in 2010, limited to the amount needed to earn no more than a 10.15% retail ROE. Georgia Power is required to file a general rate case by July 1, 2010, in response to which the Georgia PSC would be expected to determine whether the 2007 Retail Rate Plan should be continued, modified, or discontinued. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Georgia“Retail Regulatory Matters – Georgia Power Retail Regulatory Matters”Rate Plans” for additional information.
Fuel Cost Recovery
The traditional operating companies each have established fuel cost recovery rates approved by their respective state PSCs. Over the past severalIn previous years, the traditional operating companies have continued to experienceexperienced higher than expected fuel costs for coal, natural gas, and uranium. The traditional operating companies continuously monitor the under recovered fuel cost balance in light of theseThese higher fuel costs. Each of the traditional operating companies received approvalcosts have resulted in 2007 and/or 2008 to increase its fuel cost recovery factor to recover existing under recovered amounts as well as projected future costs. At December 31, 2008, the amount oftotal under recovered fuel costs included in the balance sheets was $1.2 billion compared to $1.1 billionof Georgia Power and Gulf Power of approximately $667 million at December 31, 2007.2009. During the third quarter 2009, Alabama Power and Mississippi Power collected all previously under recovered fuel costs and, as of December 31, 2009, have a total over recovered fuel balance of $229 million. The total under recovered fuel costs included in the balance sheets of the traditional operating companies at December 31, 2008 was $1.2 billion. The traditional operating companies continuously monitor the under or over recovered fuel cost balances.
Fuel cost recovery revenues as recorded on the financial statements are adjusted for differences in actual recoverable costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Accordingly, changing the billing factor has no significant effect on the Company’s revenues or net income, but does impact annual cash flow. Based on their respective state PSC orders, a portion of the under recovered regulatory clause revenues for Alabama Power and Georgia Power was reclassified from current assets to deferred charges and other assets in the balance sheets. See Note 1 to the financial statements under “Revenues” and Note 3 to the financial statements under “Alabama“Retail Regulatory Matters – Alabama Power Retail– Fuel Cost Recovery” and “Retail Regulatory Matters”, “GeorgiaMatters – Georgia Power Retail Regulatory Matters”, and “Gulf Power Retail Regulatory Matters”– Fuel Cost Recovery” for additional information.
Storm Damage Cost Recovery
Each traditional operating company maintains a reserve to cover the cost of damages from major storms to its transmission and distribution lines and generally the cost of uninsured damages to its generation facilities and other property. In addition, each of the traditional operating companies has been authorized by its state PSC to defer the portion of the major storm restoration costs that exceeded the balance in its storm damage reserve account. As of December 31, 2008, the under recovered balance in Southern Company’s storm damage reserve accounts totaled approximately $27 million, of which approximately $21 million and $6 million, respectively, are included in the balance sheets herein under “Other Current Assets” and “Other Regulatory Assets.”
See Notes 1 and 3 to the financial statements under “Storm Damage Reserves” and “Storm Damage Cost Recovery,” respectively, for additional information on these reserves. The final outcome of these matters cannot now be determined.

II-32


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Mississippi Base Load Construction Legislation
In the 2008 regular session of the Mississippi legislature, a bill was passed and signed by the Governor on May 9, 2008 to enhance the Mississippi PSC’s authority to facilitate development and construction of base load generation in the State of Mississippi (Baseload Act). The Baseload Act authorizes, but does not require, the Mississippi PSC to adopt a cost recovery mechanism that includes in retail base rates, prior to and during construction, all or a portion of the prudently incurred pre-construction and construction costs incurred by a utility in constructing a base load electric generating plant. Prior to the passage of the Baseload Act, such costs would traditionally be recovered only after the plant was placed in service. The Baseload Act also provides for periodic prudence reviews by the Mississippi PSC and prohibits the cancellation of any such generating plant without the approval of the Mississippi PSC. In the event of cancellation of the construction of the plant without approval of the Mississippi PSC, the Baseload Act authorizes the Mississippi PSC to make a public interest determination as to whether and to what extent the utility will be afforded rate recovery for costs incurred in connection with such cancelled generating plant. The effect of this legislation on Southern Company cannot now be determined.
Mirant Matters
Mirant was an energy company with businesses that included independent power projects and energy trading and risk management companies in the U.S. and selected other countries. It was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Southern Company until its initial public offering in October 2000. In April 2001, Southern Company completed a spin-off to its shareholders of its remaining ownership, and Mirant became an independent corporate entity.
In July 2003, Mirant and certain of its affiliates filed for voluntary reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. In January 2006, Mirant’s plan of reorganization became effective, and Mirant emerged from bankruptcy. As part of the plan, Mirant transferred substantially all of its assets and its restructured debt to a new corporation that adopted the name Mirant Corporation (Reorganized Mirant). Southern Company has certain contingent liabilities associated with guarantees of contractual commitments made by Mirant’s subsidiaries discussed in Note 7 to the financial statements under “Guarantees” and with various lawsuits discussed in Note 3 to the financial statements under “Mirant Matters.”
In December 2004, as a result of concluding an IRS audit for the tax years 2000 and 2001, Southern Company paid approximately $39 million in additional tax and interest related to Mirant tax items and filed a claim in Mirant’s bankruptcy case for that amount.  Through December 2008, Southern Company received from the IRS approximately $38 million in refunds related to Mirant. Southern Company believes it has a right to recoup the $39 million tax payment owed by Mirant from such tax refunds.  As a result, Southern Company intends to retain the tax refunds and reduce its claim against Mirant for the payment of Mirant taxes by the amount of such refunds.  MC Asset Recovery, a special purpose subsidiary of Reorganized Mirant, has objected to and sought to equitably subordinate the Southern Company tax claim in its fraudulent transfer litigation against Southern Company. Southern Company has reserved the remaining amount with respect to its Mirant tax claim.
If Southern Company is ultimately required to make any additional payments either with respect to the IRS audit or its contingent obligations under guarantees of Mirant subsidiaries, Mirant’s indemnification obligation to Southern Company for these additional payments, if allowed, would constitute unsecured claims against Mirant, entitled to stock in Reorganized Mirant. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Mirant Matters — Mirant Bankruptcy.”
In June 2005, Mirant, as a debtor in possession, and The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Mirant Corporation filed a complaint against Southern Company in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas, which was amended in July 2005, February 2006, May 2006, and March 2007. In January 2006, MC Asset Recovery was substituted as plaintiff. The fourth amended complaint (the complaint) alleges that Southern Company caused Mirant to engage in certain fraudulent transfers and to pay illegal dividends to Southern Company

II-33


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
prior to the spin-off. The complaint also seeks to recharacterize certain advances from Southern Company to Mirant for investments in energy facilities from debt to equity. The complaint further alleges that Southern Company is liable to Mirant’s creditors for the full amount of Mirant’s liability under an alter ego theory of recovery and that Southern Company breached its fiduciary duties to Mirant and its creditors, caused Mirant to breach its fiduciary duties to creditors, and aided and abetted breaches of fiduciary duties by Mirant’s directors and officers. The complaint also seeks recoveries under the theories of restitution and unjust enrichment. In addition, the complaint alleged a claim under the Federal Debt Collection Procedure Act (FDCPA) to avoid certain transfers from Mirant to Southern Company; however, on July 7, 2008, the court ruled that the FDCPA does not apply and that Georgia law should apply instead. The complaint seeks monetary damages in excess of $2 billion plus interest, punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs. Finally, the complaint includes an objection to Southern Company’s pending claims against Mirant in the Bankruptcy Court (which relate to reimbursement under the separation agreements of payments such as income taxes, interest, legal fees, and other guarantees described in Note 7 to the financial statements) and seeks equitable subordination of Southern Company’s claims to the claims of all other creditors. Southern Company served an answer to the complaint in April 2007.
In February 2006, the Company’s motion to transfer the case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia was granted. In May 2006, Southern Company filed a motion for summary judgment seeking entry of judgment against the plaintiff as to all counts in the complaint. In December 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia granted in part and denied in part the motion. As a result, certain breach of fiduciary duty claims alleged in earlier versions of the complaint were barred; all other claims were allowed to proceed. On August 6, 2008, Southern Company filed a second motion for summary judgment. MC Asset Recovery filed its response to Southern Company’s motion for summary judgment on October 20, 2008. On February 5, 2009, the court denied the summary judgment motion in connection with the fraudulent conveyance and illegal dividend claims concerning certain advance return/loan repayments in 1999, dividends in 1999 and 2000, and transfers in connection with Mirant’s separation from Southern Company. The court granted Southern Company’s motion for summary judgment with respect to certain claims, including claims for restitution and unjust enrichment, claims that Southern Company aided and abetted Mirant’s directors’ breach of fiduciary duties to Mirant, and claims that Southern Company used Mirant as an alter ego. In addition, the court granted Southern Company’s motion in connection with the fraudulent transfer and illegal dividend claims concerning certain turbine termination payments. Southern Company believes there is no meritorious basis for the claims in the complaint and is vigorously defending itself in this action. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Mirant Matters — MC Asset Recovery Litigation” for additional information. The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Mirant Securities Litigation
In November 2002, Southern Company, certain former and current senior officers of Southern Company, and 12 underwriters of Mirant’s initial public offering were added as defendants in a class action lawsuit that several Mirant shareholders originally filed against Mirant and certain Mirant officers in May 2002. Several other similar lawsuits filed subsequently were consolidated into this litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The amended complaint is based on allegations related to alleged improper energy trading and marketing activities involving the California energy market, alleged false statements and omissions in Mirant’s prospectus for its initial public offering and in subsequent public statements by Mirant, and accounting-related issues previously disclosed by Mirant. The lawsuit purports to include persons who acquired Mirant securities between September 26, 2000 and September 5, 2002.
In July 2003, the court dismissed all claims based on Mirant’s alleged improper energy trading and marketing activities involving the California energy market. The other claims do not allege any improper trading and marketing activity, accounting errors, or material misstatements or omissions on the part of Southern Company but seek to impose liability on Southern Company based on allegations that Southern Company was a “control person”

II-34


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
as to Mirant prior to the spin-off date. Southern Company filed an answer to the consolidated amended class action complaint in September 2003. Plaintiffs also filed a motion for class certification.
During Mirant’s Chapter 11 proceeding, the securities litigation was stayed, with the exception of limited discovery. Since Mirant’s plan of reorganization has become effective, the stay has been lifted. In March 2006, the plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration requesting that the court vacate that portion of its July 2003 order dismissing the plaintiffs’ claims based upon Mirant’s alleged improper energy trading and marketing activities involving the California energy market. Southern Company and the other defendants opposed the plaintiffs’ motion. In March 2007, the court granted plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration, reinstated the California energy market claims, and granted in part and denied in part defendants’ motion to compel certain class certification discovery. In March 2007, defendants filed renewed motions to dismiss the California energy claims on grounds originally set forth in their 2003 motions to dismiss, but which were not addressed by the court. In July 2007, certain defendants, including Southern Company, filed motions for reconsideration of the court’s denial of a motion seeking dismissal of certain federal securities laws claims based upon, among other things, certain alleged errors included in financial statements issued by Mirant. On August 6, 2008, the court entered an order in regard to the defendants’ motions to dismiss and for partial summary judgment. The court granted the defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment in two respects concluding that certain holders of Mirant stock do not have standing under the securities laws. The court denied the defendants’ other motions and granted leave to the plaintiffs to re-plead their claims against the defendants. In accordance with the court’s order, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The plaintiffs added allegations based upon claims asserted against Southern Company in the MC Asset Recovery litigation. Southern Company and the remaining defendants filed motions to dismiss the amended complaint on October 9, 2008. On January 7, 2009, the trial judge dismissed all counts of the plaintiffs’ second amended complaint with prejudice. This matter is now concluded.
Income Tax Matters
Legislation
On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). Major tax incentives in the ARRA include an extension of bonus depreciation and multiple renewable energy incentives. These incentives, which could have a significant impact on Southern Company’sthe future cash flow and net income. Additionally,income of Southern Company. Southern Company’s cash flow reduction to 2009 tax payments as a result of the bonus depreciation provisions of the ARRA includes programswas approximately $250 million. On December 8, 2009, President Obama announced proposals to accelerate job growth that include an extension of the bonus depreciation provision for renewable energy,the ARRA for 2010, which could have a significant impact on the future cash flow and net income of Southern Company.
On October 27, 2009, Southern Company and its subsidiaries received notice that an award of $165 million had been granted under the ARRA grant application for transmission and smart grid enhancement, fossil energydistribution automation and research,modernization projects pending final negotiations. Southern Company continues to assess the other financial implications of the ARRA.
The U.S. House of Representatives and energy efficiencythe U.S. Senate have passed separate bills related to healthcare reform. Both bills include a provision that would make Medicare Part D subsidy reimbursements taxable. If enacted into law, this provision could have a

II-28


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and conservation. Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
significant negative impact on Southern Company’s net income. See Note 2 to the financial statements under “Other Postretirement Benefits” for additional information.
The ultimate impact of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Income Tax Matters
Georgia State Income Tax Credits
Georgia Power’s 2005 through 2008 income tax filings for the State of Georgia include state income tax credits for increased activity through Georgia ports. Georgia Power has also filed similar claims for the years 2002 through 2004. The Georgia Department of Revenue has not responded to these claims. In July 2007, Georgia Power filed a complaint in the Superior Court of Fulton County to recover the credits claimed for the years 2002 through 2004. An unrecognized tax benefit has been recorded related to these credits. See Note 5 to the financial statements under “Unrecognized Tax Benefits” for additional information. If Georgia Power prevails, these claims could have a significant, and possibly material, positive effect on Southern Company’s net income. If Georgia Power is not successful, payment of the related state tax could have a significant, and possibly material, negative effect on Southern Company’s cash flow. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
Internal Revenue Code Section 199 Domestic Production Deduction
The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 created a tax deduction for a portion of income attributable to U.S. production activities as defined in Section 199 of the Internal Revenue Code Section 199 (production activities deduction).Code. The

II-35


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
deduction is equal to a stated percentage of qualified production activities net income. The percentage is phased in over the years 2005 through 2010 with a 3% rate applicable to the years 2005 and 2006, a 6% rate applicable for the years 2007 through 2009, and a 9% rate thereafter. The IRS has not clearly defined a methodology for calculating this deduction. However, Southern Company has agreed with the IRS on a calculation methodology and signed a closing agreement on December 11, 2008. Therefore, Southern Company reversed the unrecognized tax benefit and adjusted the deduction to conform to the agreement. The net impact of the reversal of the unrecognized tax benefits combined with the application of the new methodology had no material effect on the Company’s financial statements. See Note 5 to the financial statements under “Effective Tax Rate” for additional information.
Construction ProjectsProgram
The subsidiary companies of Southern Company are engaged in continuous construction programs to accommodate existing and estimated future loads on their respective systems. Southern Company intends to continue its strategy of developing and constructing new generating facilities, including units at Southern Power, proposed new nuclear units, and a proposed IGCC facility, as well as adding environmental control equipment and expanding the transmission and distribution systems. For the traditional operating companies, major generation construction projects are subject to state PSC approvals in order to be included in retail rates. While Southern Power generally constructs and acquires generation assets covered by long-term PPAs, any uncontracted capacity could negatively affect future earnings. See Note 7 to the financial statements under “Construction Program” for estimated construction expenditures for the next three years. In addition, see Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters – Georgia Power – Nuclear Construction” and “Retail Regulatory Matters – Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle
On January 16, 2009, Mississippi Power filed for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity with the Mississippi PSC to allow construction of a new electric generating plant located in Kemper County, Mississippi. The plant would utilize an advanced coal IGCC with an output capacity of 582 megawatts. The Kemper IGCC will use locally mined lignite (an abundant, lower heating value coal) from a proposed mine adjacent to the plant as fuel. This certificate, if approved by the Mississippi PSC, would authorize Mississippi Power to acquire, construct and operate the Kemper IGCC and related facilities. The Kemper IGCC, subject to federal and state environmental reviews and certain regulatory approvals, is expected to begin commercial operation in November 2013. As part of its filing, Mississippi Power has requested certain rate recovery treatment in accordance with the base load construction legislation. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “PSC Matters – Mississippi Base Load Construction Legislation” hereinCycle” for additional information.
Mississippi Power filed an application in June 2006 with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for certain tax credits available to projects using clean coal technologies under the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The DOE subsequently certified the Kemper IGCC, and in November 2006 the IRS allocated Internal Revenue Code Section 48A tax credits of $133 million to Mississippi Power. The utilization of these credits is dependent upon meeting the certification requirements for the Kemper IGCC, including an in-service date no later than November 2013. Mississippi Power has secured all environmental reviews and permits necessary to commence construction of the Kemper IGCC and has entered into a binding contract for the steam turbine generator, completing two milestone requirements for the Section 48A credits.
On February 14, 2008, Mississippi Power also requested that the DOE transfer the remaining funds previously granted to a cancelled Southern Company project that would have been located in Orlando, Florida. On December 12, 2008, an agreement was reached to assign the remaining funds to the Kemper IGCC. The estimated construction cost of the Kemper IGCC is approximately $2.2 billion, which is net of $220 million related to funding to be received from the DOE related to project construction. The remaining DOE funding of $50 million is projected to be used for demonstration over the first few years of operation.
Beginning in December 2006, the Mississippi PSC has approved Mississippi Power’s requested accounting treatment to defer the costs associated with Mississippi Power’s generation resource planning, evaluation, and screening activities as a regulatory asset. On December 22, 2008, Mississippi Power requested an amendment to its original order that would allow these costs to continue to be charged to and remain in a regulatory asset until January 1, 2010. In its application, Mississippi Power reported that it anticipated spending approximately $61 million by or before May 31, 2009. At December 31, 2008, Mississippi Power had spent $42.3 million of the $61 million, of which $3.7 million related to land purchases capitalized. Of the remaining amount, $0.8 million was expensed and $37.8 million was deferred in other regulatory assets.
The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.

II-36


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Nuclear
In August 2006, Southern Nuclear, on behalf of Georgia Power, Oglethorpe Power Corporation, the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, and the City of Dalton, Georgia, an incorporated municipality in the State of Georgia acting by and through its Board of Water, Light and Sinking Fund Commissioners (collectively, Owners), filed an application with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for an early site permit relating to two additional nuclear units on the site of Plant Vogtle. See Note 4 to the financial statements for additional information on these co-owners. On March 31, 2008, Southern Nuclear filed an application with the NRC for a combined construction and operating license (COL) for the new units.
On April 8, 2008, Georgia Power, acting for itself and as agent for the Owners, and a consortium consisting of Westinghouse Electric Company LLC and Stone & Webster, Inc. (collectively, Consortium) entered into an engineering, procurement, and construction agreement to design, engineer, procure, construct, and test two AP1000 nuclear units with electric generating capacity of approximately 1,100 megawatts each and related facilities, structures, and improvements at Plant Vogtle (Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement).
The Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement is an arrangement whereby the Consortium supplies and constructs the entire facility with the exception of certain items provided by the Owners. Under the terms of the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement, the Owners will pay a purchase price that will be subject to certain price escalation and adjustments, adjustments for change orders, and performance bonuses. Each Owner is severally (and not jointly) liable for its proportionate share, based on its ownership interest, of all amounts owed to the Consortium under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement. Georgia Power’s proportionate share, based on its current ownership interest, is 45.7%. Under the terms of a separate joint development agreement, the Owners finalized their ownership percentages on July 2, 2008, except for allowed changes, under certain limited circumstances, during the Georgia PSC certification process.  
On August 1, 2008, Georgia Power submitted an application for the Georgia PSC to certify the project. Hearings began November 3, 2008 and a final certification decision is expected in March 2009.
If certified by the Georgia PSC and licensed by the NRC, Vogtle Units 3 and 4 are scheduled to be placed in service in 2016 and 2017, respectively. The total plant value to be placed in service will also include financing costs for each of the Owners, the impacts of inflation on costs, and transmission and other costs that are the responsibility of the Owners. Georgia Power’s proportionate share of the estimated in-service costs, based on its current ownership interest, is approximately $6.4 billion, subject to adjustments and performance bonuses under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement.
The Owners and the Consortium have agreed to certain liquidated damages upon the Consortium’s failure to comply with the schedule and performance guarantees. The Owners and the Consortium also have agreed to certain bonuses payable to the Consortium for early completion and unit performance. The Consortium’s liability to the Owners for schedule and performance liquidated damages and warranty claims is subject to a cap.
The obligations of Westinghouse Electric Company LLC and Stone & Webster, Inc. under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement are guaranteed by Toshiba Corporation and The Shaw Group, Inc., respectively. In the event of certain credit rating downgrades of any Owner, such Owner will be required to provide a letter of credit or other credit enhancement.
The Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement is subject to certification by the Georgia PSC. In addition, the Owners may terminate the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement at any time for their convenience, provided that the Owners will be required to pay certain termination costs and, at certain stages of the work, cancellation fees to the Consortium. The Consortium may terminate the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement under certain circumstances, including delays in receipt of the COL or

II-37


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
delivery of full notice to proceed, certain Owner suspension or delays of work, action by a governmental authority to permanently stop work, certain breaches of the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement by the Owners, Owner insolvency, and certain other events.  
In connection with the certification application, Georgia Power has requested Georgia PSC approval to include the construction work in progress accounts for Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 in rate base and allow Georgia Power to recover financing costs during the construction period.
On February 11, 2009, the Georgia State Senate passed Senate Bill 31 that would allow the Company to recover financing costs for nuclear construction projects by including the related construction work in progress accounts in rate base during the construction period. A similar bill is being considered in the Georgia State House of Representatives.
Southern Company also is participating in NuStart Energy Development, LLC (NuStart Energy), a broad-based nuclear industry consortium formed to share the cost of developing a COL and the related NRC review. NuStart Energy was organized to complete detailed engineering design work and to prepare COL applications for two advanced reactor designs. COLs for the two reactor designs were submitted to the NRC during the fourth quarter of 2007. The COLs ultimately are expected to be transferred to one or more of the consortium companies; however, at this time, none of them have committed to build a new nuclear plant.
Southern Company is also exploring other possibilities relating to additional nuclear power projects, both on its own or in partnership with other utilities.
The final outcome of these matters cannot now be determined.
Nuclear Relicensing
The NRC operating licenses for Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2 currently expire in January 2027 and February 2029, respectively. In June 2007, Georgia Power filed an application with the NRC to extend the licenses for Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2 for an additional 20 years. Georgia Power anticipates the NRC may make a decision regarding the license extension for Plant Vogtle in 2009.
Other Matters
Georgia Power has initiated a voluntary attrition plan under which participating employees may elect to resign from their positions as of March 31, 2009. Approximately 700 employees who have indicated an interest in participating in the plan have been selected by Georgia Power and are permitted to resign and receive severance. Each participating employee who resigns under the plan will be entitled to receive a severance payment equal to his or her annual base salary, accrued vacation, and pro-rated bonus as of March 31, 2009. Southern Company will record a charge during the first quarter 2009 in connection with the plan. The ultimate amount of the charge will be dependent on the total number of employees who elect to resign under the plan. Such charge could have a material impact on Southern Company’s statements of income for the quarter ending March 31, 2009 and statements of cash flow for the six months ending June 30, 2009. The first quarter 2009 charge will generally be offset with lower salary costs for the remainder of the year and is not expected to have a material impact on Southern Company’s financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2009.
Southern Company isits subsidiaries are involved in various other matters being litigated, regulatory matters, and certain tax-related issues that could affect future earnings. In addition, Southern Company isand its subsidiaries are subject to certain claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. The business activities of Southern Company’s business activitiessubsidiaries are subject to extensive governmental regulation related to public health and the environment.environment, such as regulation of air emissions and water discharges. Litigation over environmental issues and

II-38


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
claims of various types, including property damage, personal injury, common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of environmental requirements such as opacity and air and water quality standards, has increased generally throughout the United States. In particular, personal injury and other claims for damages caused by alleged exposure to hazardous materials, and common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas and other emissions, have become more frequent. The ultimate outcome of such pending or potential litigation against Southern Company and its subsidiaries cannot be predicted at this time; however, for current proceedings not specifically reported herein, management does not anticipate that the liabilities, if any, arising from such current proceedings would have a material adverse effect on Southern Company’s financial statements. See Note 3 to the financial statements for information regarding material issues.

II-29


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Southern Company prepares its consolidated financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Significant accounting policies are described in Note 1 to the financial statements. In the application of these policies, certain estimates are made that may have a material impact on Southern Company’s results of operations and related disclosures. Different assumptions and measurements could produce estimates that are significantly different from those recorded in the financial statements. Senior management has discussed the development and selection of the critical accounting policies and estimates described below with the Audit Committee of Southern Company’s Board of Directors.
Electric Utility Regulation
Southern Company’s traditional operating companies, which comprised approximately 95%97% of Southern Company’s total operating revenues for 2008,2009, are subject to retail regulation by their respective state PSCs and wholesale regulation by the FERC. These regulatory agencies set the rates the traditional operating companies are permitted to charge customers based on allowable costs. As a result, the traditional operating companies apply FASB Statement No. 71, “Accounting for the Effects of Certain Types of Regulation” (SFAS No. 71),accounting standards which requiresrequire the financial statements to reflect the effects of rate regulation. Through the ratemaking process, the regulators may require the inclusion of costs or revenues in periods different than when they would be recognized by a non-regulated company. This treatment may result in the deferral of expenses and the recording of related regulatory assets based on anticipated future recovery through rates or the deferral of gains or creation of liabilities and the recording of related regulatory liabilities. The application of SFAS No. 71the accounting standards has a further effect on the Company’s financial statements as a result of the estimates of allowable costs used in the ratemaking process. These estimates may differ from those actually incurred by the traditional operating companies; therefore, the accounting estimates inherent in specific costs such as depreciation, nuclear decommissioning, and pension and postretirement benefits have less of a direct impact on the Company’s results of operations than they would on a non-regulated company.
As reflected in Note 1 to the financial statements, significant regulatory assets and liabilities have been recorded. Management reviews the ultimate recoverability of these regulatory assets and liabilities based on applicable regulatory guidelines and accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. However, adverse legislative, judicial, or regulatory actions could materially impact the amounts of such regulatory assets and liabilities and could adversely impact the Company’s financial statements.
Contingent Obligations
Southern Company and its subsidiaries are subject to a number of federal and state laws and regulations, as well as other factors and conditions that potentially subject them to environmental, litigation, income tax, and other risks. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL herein and Note 3 to the financial statements for more information regarding certain of these contingencies. Southern Company periodically evaluates its exposure to such risks and, in

II-39


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles,GAAP, records reserves for those matters where a non-tax-related loss is considered probable and reasonably estimable and records a tax asset or liability if it is more likely than not that a tax position will be sustained. The adequacy of reserves can be significantly affected by external events or conditions that can be unpredictable; thus, the ultimate outcome of such matters could materially affect Southern Company’s financial statements.
These events or conditions include the following:
Changes in existing state or federal regulation by governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, coal combustion byproducts, including coal ash, control of toxic substances, hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters.
Changes in existing income tax regulations or changes in IRS or state revenue department interpretations of existing regulations.
Identification of additional sites that require environmental remediation or the filing of other complaints in which Southern Company or its subsidiaries may be asserted to be a potentially responsible party.
Identification and evaluation of other potential lawsuits or complaints in which Southern Company or its subsidiaries may be named as a defendant.
Resolution or progression of new or existing matters through the legislative process, the court systems, the IRS, state revenue departments, the FERC, or the EPA.

II-30


Changes in existing state or federal regulation by governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, control of toxic substances, hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters.
Changes in existing income tax regulations or changes in IRS or state revenue department interpretations of existing regulations.
Identification of additional sites that require environmental remediation or the filing of other complaints in which Southern Company or its subsidiaries may be asserted to be a potentially responsible party.
Identification and evaluation of other potential lawsuits or complaints in which Southern Company or its subsidiaries may be named as a defendant.
Resolution or progression of new or existing matters through the legislative process, the court systems, the IRS, the FERC, or the EPA.
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Unbilled Revenues
Revenues related to the retail sale of electricity are recorded when electricity is delivered to customers. However, the determination of KWH sales to individual customers is based on the reading of their meters, which is performed on a systematic basis throughout the month. At the end of each month, amounts of electricity delivered to customers, but not yet metered and billed, are estimated. Components of the unbilled revenue estimates include total KWH territorial supply, total KWH billed, estimated total electricity lost in delivery, and customer usage. These components can fluctuate as a result of a number of factors including weather, generation patterns, and power delivery volume and other operational constraints. These factors can be unpredictable and can vary from historical trends. As a result, the overall estimate of unbilled revenues could be significantly affected, which could have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations.
New Accounting Standards
Business CombinationsPension and Other Postretirement Benefits
In December 2007,Southern Company’s calculation of pension and other postretirement benefits expense is dependent on a number of assumptions. These assumptions include discount rates, health care cost trend rates, expected long-term return on plan assets, mortality rates, expected salary and wage increases, and other factors. Components of pension and other postretirement benefits expense include interest and service cost on the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 141 (revised 2007), “Business Combinations” (SFAS No. 141R). pension and other postretirement benefit plans, expected return on plan assets and amortization of certain unrecognized costs and obligations. Actual results that differ from the assumptions utilized are accumulated and amortized over future periods and, therefore, generally affect recognized expense and the recorded obligation in future periods. While the Company believes that the assumptions used are appropriate, differences in actual experience or significant changes in assumptions would affect its pension and other postretirement benefits costs and obligations.
Key elements in determining Southern Company’s pension and other postretirement benefit expense in accordance with GAAP are the expected long-term return on plan assets and the discount rate used to measure the benefit plan obligations and the periodic benefit plan expense for future periods. The expected long-term return on postretirement benefit plan assets is based on Southern Company’s investment strategy, historical experience, and expectations for long-term rates of return that considers external actuarial advice.
Southern Company adopted SFAS No. 141Rdetermines the long-term return on January 1, 2009. The adoptionplan assets by applying the long-term rate of SFAS No. 141R could have an impactexpected returns on the accounting for any business combinations completed byvarious asset classes to Southern Company’s target asset allocation. Southern Company after January 1, 2009.discounts the future cash flows related to its postretirement benefit plans using a single-point discount rate developed from the weighted average of market-observed yields for high quality fixed income securities with maturities that correspond to expected benefit payments.
In December 2007,The following table illustrates the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 160, “Non-controlling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements” (SFAS No. 160). SFAS No. 160 amends Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51, “Consolidated Financial Statements”sensitivity to establish accounting and reporting standards for the non-controlling (minority) interest in a subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a subsidiary. It clarifies that a non-controlling interest in a subsidiary should be reported as equity in the consolidated financial statements and establishes a single method of accounting for changes in a parent��s ownership interest in a subsidiary that do not result in deconsolidation. Southern Company adopted SFAS No. 160 on January 1, 2009Company’s long-term assumptions with no material impactrespect to the financial statements.expected long-term rate of return on plan assets and the assumed discount rate:
Increase/(Decrease) in
Increase/(Decrease) inProjected Obligation for
Increase/(Decrease) inProjected Obligation forOther Postretirement
Total Benefit ExpensePension PlanBenefit Plans
Change in Assumptionfor 2010at December 31, 2009at December 31, 2009
(in millions)
25 basis point change in discount rate$11/$(8)$226/$(214)$53/$(51)
25 basis point change in salary assumption$9/$(8)$58/$(55)N/M
25 basis point change in long-term return on plan assets$19/$(19)N/MN/M
N/M – Not meaningful

II-40II-31


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
New Accounting Standards
Variable Interest Entities
In June 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued new guidance on the consolidation of variable interest entities, which replaces the quantitative-based risks and rewards calculation for determining whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary in a variable interest entity with an approach that is primarily qualitative, requires ongoing assessments of whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity, and requires additional disclosures about an enterprise’s involvement in variable interest entities. Southern Company adopted this new guidance effective January 1, 2010, with no material impact on its financial statements.
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY
Overview
Southern Company’s financial condition remained stable at December 31, 2008.2009. Throughout the recent turmoil in the financial markets, Southern Company has maintained adequate access to capital without drawing on any of its committed bank credit arrangements used to support its commercial paper programs and variable rate pollution control revenue bonds. Southern Company and the traditional operating companies have continued to issue commercial paper at reasonable rates. Southern Company intends to continue to monitor its access to short-term and long-term capital markets as well as its bank credit arrangements to meet future capital and liquidity needs. No material changes in bank credit arrangements have occurred although marketMarket rates for committed credit have increased, and theSouthern Company mayand its subsidiaries have been and expect to continue to be subject to higher costs as its existing facilities are replaced or renewed. Southern Company’s interest costTotal committed credit fees for short-term debt has decreased as market short-term interest rates have declined. The ultimate impact on future financing costs as a result of the financial turmoil cannot be determined at this time. Southern Company experienced no material counterparty credit losses as a resultand its subsidiaries currently average less than1/2 of the turmoil in the financial markets.1% per year. See “Sources of Capital” and “Financing Activities” herein for additional information.
Southern Company’s investments in pension and nuclear decommissioning trust funds declinedremained stable in value as of December 31, 2008.2009. Southern Company expects that the earliest that cash may have to be contributed to the pension trust fund is 20112012 and such contribution could be significant; however, projections of the amount vary significantly depending on interpretations of and decisions related to federal legislation passed during 2008 as well as other key variables including future trust fund performance and cannot be determined at this time. Southern Company does not expect any changes to funding obligations to the nuclear decommissioning trusts at this time.prior to 2011.
Net cash provided from operating activities in 2009 totaled $3.3 billion, a decrease of $201 million from the corresponding period in 2008. Significant changes in operating cash flow for 2009 as compared to the corresponding period in 2008 include a reduction to net income as previously discussed, increased levels of coal inventory, and increased cash outflows for tax payments. These uses of funds were partially offset by increased cash inflows as a result of higher fuel cost recovery rates included in customer billings. Net cash provided from operating activities in 2008 totaled $3.4$3.5 billion, an increase of $3$30 million as compared to 2007. Significant changes in operating cash flow for 2008 included a $264 million increase in the use of funds for fossil fuel inventory as compared to the corresponding period in 2007. This use of funds was offset by an increase in cash of $312 million in accrued taxes primarily due to a difference between the periods in payments for federal taxes and property taxes. Net cash provided from operating activities in 2007 totaled $3.4 billion, an increase of $575$583 million as compared to the corresponding period in 2006. The increase was primarily due to an increase in net income as previously discussed, an increase in cash collections from previously deferred fuel and storm damage costs, and a reduction in cash outflows compared to the previous year in fossil fuel inventory. In 2006, net
Net cash provided from operatingused for investing activities in 2009 totaled $2.8$4.3 billion an increase over the previous yearprimarily due to property additions to utility plant of $290 million, primarily as a result of a decrease in under recovered storm restoration costs, a decrease in accounts payable from year-end 2005 amounts that included substantial hurricane-related expenditures,$4.7 billion, partially offset by an increaseapproximately $340 million in fossil fuel inventory.
cash received from the early termination of two leveraged lease investments. Net cash used for investing activities in 2008 totaled $4.1 billion primarily due to property additions to utility plant of $4.0 billion. NetIn 2007, net cash used for investing activities in 2007 totaledwas $3.7 billion primarily due to property additions to utility plant of $3.5 billion. In 2006, net cash used for investing activities was $2.8 billion primarily due to property additions to utility plant of $3.0 billion, partially offset by proceeds from the sale of Southern Company Gas LLC and the receipt by Mississippi Power of capital grant proceeds related to Hurricane Katrina.
Net cash provided from financing activities totaled $944$1.3 billion in 2009 primarily due to the issuance of new long-term debt and common stock issuances, partially offset by cash outflows for repayments of long-term debt and dividend payments. Net cash provided from financing activities totaled $878 million in 2008 primarily due to long-term debt issuances. Net cash provided from financing activities totaled $348$309 million in 2007 primarily due to replacement of short-term debt with longer term financing and cash raised from common stock programs. In 2006, net cash used for financing activities was $21 million.
Significant balance sheet changes in 20082009 include an increase of $3.4 billion in total property, plant, and equipment for the installation of $2.5 billionequipment to comply with environmental standards and an increase in long-term debt, excluding amounts due within one year,construction of $2.7 billion used primarily for construction expendituresgeneration, transmission, and general corporate purposes.distribution facilities. Other significant balance sheet changes which are

II-41II-32


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
primarily attributable to the decline in market value of the Company’s pension trust fundsignificant changes include a decrease of $2.4 billion in prepaid pension costs, an increase of $1.9 billion in other regulatory assets, and a decreaselong-term debt, excluding amounts due within one year, of $1.3 billion in other regulatory liabilities.used primarily for construction expenditures and general corporate purposes and $1.6 billion of additional equity.
At the end of 2008,2009, the closing price of Southern Company’s common stock was $37.00$33.32 per share, compared with book value of $17.08$18.15 per share. The market-to-book value ratio was 217%184% at the end of 2008,2009, compared with 239%217% at year-end 2007.2008.
Southern Company, each of the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power have received investment grade credit ratings from the major rating agencies with respect to debt, preferred securities, preferred stock, and/or preference stock. SCSSouthern Company Services, Inc. has an investment grade corporate credit rating. See “Credit Rating Risk” herein for additional information.
Sources of Capital
Southern Company intends to meet its future capital needs through internal cash flow and external security issuances. Equity capital can be provided from any combination of the Company’s stock plans, private placements, or public offerings. The amount and timing of additional equity capital to be raised in 2009,2010, as well as in subsequent years, will be contingent on Southern Company’s investment opportunities.
The traditional operating companies and Southern Power plan to obtain the funds required for construction and other purposes from sources similar to those used in the past, which were primarily from operating cash flows, security issuances, term loans, short-term borrowings, and equity contributions from Southern Company. However, the type and timing of any financings, if needed, will depend upon prevailing market conditions, regulatory approval, and other factors. In addition, on February 16, 2010, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) offered Georgia Power a conditional commitment for federal loan guarantees that would apply to future Georgia Power borrowings related to two additional nuclear units on the site of Plant Vogtle (Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4). Any borrowings guaranteed by the DOE would be full recourse to Georgia Power and secured by a first priority lien on Georgia Power’s 45.7% undivided ownership interest in Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4. Total guaranteed borrowings would not exceed 70% of eligible project costs, or approximately $3.4 billion, and are expected to be funded by the Federal Financing Bank. Georgia Power has 90 days to accept the conditional commitment, including obtaining any necessary regulatory approvals. Georgia Power will work with the DOE to finalize loan guarantees. Final approval and issuance of loan guarantees by the DOE are subject to receipt of the combined construction and operating license for Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), negotiation of definitive agreements, completion of due diligence by the DOE, receipt of any necessary regulatory approvals, and satisfaction of other conditions. There can be no assurance that the DOE will issue loan guarantees for Georgia Power.
The issuance of securities by the traditional operating companies is generally subject to the approval of the applicable state PSC. In addition, theThe issuance of all securities by Mississippi Power and Southern Power and short-term securities by Georgia Power is generally subject to regulatory approval by the FERC. Additionally, with respect to the public offering of securities, Southern Company and certain of its subsidiaries file registration statements with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (1933 Act). The amounts of securities authorized by the appropriate regulatory authorities, as well as the amounts, if any, registered under the 1933 Act, are continuously monitored and appropriate filings are made to ensure flexibility in the capital markets.
Southern Company, each traditional operating company, and Southern Power obtain financing separately without credit support from any affiliate. See Note 6 to the financial statements under “Bank Credit Arrangements” for additional information. The Southern Company system does not maintain a centralized cash or money pool. Therefore, funds of each company are not commingled with funds of any other company.
Southern Company’s current liabilities frequently exceed current assets because of the continued use of short-term debt as a funding source to meet cash needs as well as scheduled maturities of long-term debt. To meet short-term cash needs and contingencies, Southern Company has substantial cash flow from operating activities and access to capital markets, including commercial paper programs (which are backed by bank credit facilities).
At December 31, 2008,2009, Southern Company and its subsidiaries had approximately $417$690 million of cash and cash equivalents and $4.2$4.8 billion of unused credit arrangements with banks, of which $970 million$1.5 billion expire in 2009,2010, $25 million expire in 2011, and $3.2 billion expire in 2012. Approximately $84$81 million of the credit facilities expiring in 20092010 allow for the execution of term loans for an additional two-year period, and $544$517 million allow for the execution of one-year term loans. Most of these arrangements contain covenants that limit debt levels and typically contain cross default provisions that are restricted only to the indebtedness of the individual company. Southern Company and its subsidiaries are currently in compliance with all such covenants. See Note 6A portion of the unused credit with banks is allocated to provide liquidity support to the financial statements under “Bank Credit Arrangements” for additional information.traditional operating companies’ variable rate pollution control

II-42II-33


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
revenue bonds. The amount of variable rate pollution control revenue bonds requiring liquidity support as of December 31, 2009 was approximately $1.6 billion. Subsequent to December 31, 2009, two remarketings of pollution control revenue bonds increased that amount to $1.8 billion. See Note 6 to the financial statements under “Bank Credit Arrangements” for additional information.
Financing Activities
During 2008,2009, Southern Company issued $350 million of Series 2009A 4.15% Senior Notes due May 15, 2014 and $300 million of Series 2009B Floating Rate Senior Notes due October 21, 2011, and its subsidiaries issued $2.5$1.8 billion of senior notes and $566incurred obligations of $625 million of obligations related to the issuance of pollution control revenue bonds. In addition, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power entered into long-term bank loansA portion of $300the proceeds of the newly issued pollution control revenue bonds were used to retire $327 million $110 million, and $80 million, respectively. Georgia Power and Gulf Power also entered into short-term bank loans of $100 million and $50 million, respectively. Interest rate hedges of $405 million notional amount were settled at a loss of $26 million related to the issuances.outstanding pollution control revenue bonds. Southern Company also issued $47422.6 million shares of common stock for $673 million through the Southern Company Investment Plan and employee and director stock plans. In addition, Southern Company issued 19.9 million shares of common stock through at-the-market issuances pursuant to sales agency agreements related to Southern Company’s continuous equity offering program and received cash proceeds of $613 million, net of $6 million in fees and commissions. The security issuancesproceeds were primarily used to redeem or repay at maturity $1.5$1.2 billion of long-term debt, to reduce short-term indebtedness, to fund Southern Company’s ongoing construction program,projects, to repay short-term and long-term indebtedness, and for general corporate purposes. Additionally, interest rate hedges of $100 million were settled early at a loss of $2 million related to counterparty credit issues.
Also in 2008, the traditional operating companies converted their entire $1.2 billion of obligations related to auction rate pollution control revenue bonds from auction rate modes to other interest rate modes. Initially, approximately $696 million of the auction rate pollution control revenue bonds were converted to fixed interest rate modes and approximately $553 million were converted to variable rate modes. In June 2008, approximately $98 million of the variable rate pollution control revenue bonds were converted to fixed interest rate modes.
During the third quarter 2008, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, and Mississippi Power were required to purchase a total of approximately $96 million of variable rate pollution control revenue bonds that were tendered by investors. Alabama Power and Mississippi Power remarketed all of their repurchased variable rate pollution control revenue bonds of $11 million and $8 million, respectively. Georgia Power remarketed $75 million of its $77 million of tendered bonds. The remaining $2 million were extinguished.
In the fourth quarter 2008,during 2009, Georgia Power and Gulf Power converted a totalentered into forward starting interest rate swaps to mitigate exposure to interest rate changes related to anticipated debt issuances. The notional amounts of approximately $171the swaps totaled $200 million and $100 million, respectively. Georgia Power had net realized losses of $19 million upon termination of $300 million of variable rate pollution control revenue bonds to fixed interest rate modes.hedges during 2009. The effective portion of these losses has been deferred in other comprehensive income and is being amortized to interest expense over the life of the original interest rate hedge.
SubsequentIn 2009, Southern Company used a portion of the cash received from the early termination of two leveraged lease investments to December 31, 2008, Georgia Power issued $500extinguish $253 million of Series 2009A 5.95% Senior Notes due February 1, 2039. The proceeds were used to repay $150 million of its Series U Floating Rate Senior Notes at maturity, to repay short-term indebtedness, and for other general corporate purposes. Georgia Power settled $100 million of hedgesdebt which included all debt related to the issuance at a lossthese leveraged lease investments and to pay make-whole redemption premiums of approximately $16 million.$17 million associated with such debt.
In addition to any financings that may be necessary to meet capital requirements and contractual obligations, Southern Company and its subsidiaries plan to continue, when economically feasible, a program to retire higher-cost securities and replace these obligations with lower-cost capital if market conditions permit.
Off-Balance Sheet Financing Arrangements
In 2001, Mississippi Power began the initial 10-year term of a lease agreement for a combined cycle generating facility built at Plant Daniel for approximately $370 million. In 2003, the generating facility was acquired by Juniper Capital L.P. (Juniper), a limited partnership whose investors are unaffiliated with Mississippi Power. Simultaneously, Juniper entered into a restructured lease agreement with Mississippi Power. Juniper has also entered into leases with other parties unrelated to Mississippi Power. The assets leased by Mississippi Power comprise less than 50% of Juniper’s assets. Mississippi Power is not required to consolidate the leased assets and related liabilities, and the lease with Juniper is considered an operating lease. The lease also provides for a residual value guarantee, approximately 73% of the acquisition cost, by Mississippi Power that is due upon termination of the lease in the event that Mississippi Power does not renew the lease or purchase the assets and that the fair market value is less than the unamortized cost of the assets. In April 2010, 18 months prior to the end of the initial lease term, Mississippi Power may elect to renew for 10 years. See Note 7 to the financial statements under “Operating Leases” for additional information.

II-43


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Credit Rating Risk
Southern Company does not have any credit arrangements that would require material changes in payment schedules or terminations as a result of a credit rating downgrade. There are certain contracts that could require collateral, but not accelerated payment, in the event of a credit rating change of certain subsidiaries to BBB and Baa2, or BBB- and/or Baa3 or below. These contracts are for physical electricity purchases and sales, fuel purchases, fuel transportation and storage, emissions allowances, energy price risk management, and construction of new generation.generation facilities. At December 31, 2008,2009, the maximum potential collateral requirements under these contracts at a BBB and Baa2 rating were approximately $9 million and at a BBB- and/or Baa3 rating were approximately $395$467 million. At December 31, 2008,2009, the maximum potential collateral requirements under these contracts at a rating below BBB- and/or Baa3 were approximately $1.8$2.3 billion. Generally, collateral may be provided by a Southern Company guaranty, letter of credit, or cash. Additionally, any credit rating downgrade could impact theSouthern Company’s ability to access capital markets, particularly the short-term debt market.

II-34


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
On September 2, 2009, Moody’s Investors Service (Moody’s) affirmed the credit ratings of Southern Company’s senior unsecured notes and commercial paper of A3/P-1, respectively, and revised the rating outlook for Southern Company to negative. On September 4, 2009, Fitch Ratings, Inc. affirmed Southern Company’s long-term and commercial paper credit ratings of A/F1, respectively, and maintained its stable rating outlook. On October 6, 2009, Standard and Poor’s Rating Services, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. (S&P) affirmed the credit ratings of Southern Company’s senior unsecured notes and commercial paper of A-/A-1, respectively, and maintained a stable rating outlook.
Market Price Risk
Southern Company is exposed to market risks, primarily commodity price risk and interest rate risk. To manage the volatility attributable to these exposures, the Company nets the exposures, where possible, to take advantage of natural offsets and enters into various derivative transactions for the remaining exposures pursuant to the Company’s policies in areas such as counterparty exposure and risk management practices. Company policy is that derivatives are to be used primarily for hedging purposes and mandates strict adherence to all applicable risk management policies. Derivative positions are monitored using techniques including, but not limited to, market valuation, value at risk, stress testing, and sensitivity analysis.
To mitigate future exposure to a change in interest rates, the Company enters into forward starting interest rate swaps and other derivatives that have been designated as hedges. Derivatives outstanding at December 31, 20082009 have a notional amount of $1.4 billion$976 million and are related to anticipated debt issuances and various floating rate obligations over the next two years.year. The weighted average interest rate on $1.6$2.7 billion of long-term variable interest rate exposure that has not been hedged at January 1, 20092010 was 2.45%0.76%. If Southern Company sustained a 100 basis point change in interest rates for all unhedged variable rate long-term debt, the change would affect annualized interest expense by approximately $16$27 million at January 1, 2009.2010. For further information, see NotesNote 1 and 6 to the financial statements under “Financial Instruments.”Instruments” and Note 11 to the financial statements.
Due to cost-based rate regulation, the traditional operating companies continue to have limited exposure to market volatility in interest rates, commodity fuel prices, and prices of electricity. In addition, Southern Power’s exposure to market volatility in commodity fuel prices and prices of electricity is limited because its long-term sales contracts shift substantially all fuel cost responsibility to the purchaser. However, Southern Power has been and may continue to be exposed to market volatility in energy-related commodity prices as a result of sales of uncontracted generating capacity. To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in electricity prices, the traditional operating companies enter into physical fixed-price contracts for the purchase and sale of electricity through the wholesale electricity market and, to a lesser extent, into financial hedge contracts for natural gas purchases. The traditional operating companies continue to manage fuel-hedging programs implemented per the guidelines of their respective state PSCs.

II-44


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
The changes in fair value of energy-related derivative contracts were as follows at December 31:
        
 2009 2008
         Changes Changes
 2008 2007
 Changes Changes Fair Value
 Fair Value
 (in millions) (in millions)
Contracts outstanding at the beginning of the period, assets (liabilities), net  $4 $(82) $(285) $4 
Contracts realized or settled   (150) 80  367  (150)
Current period changes(a)
  (139) 6   (260)  (139)
Contracts outstanding at the end of the period, assets (liabilities), net  $(285) $4  $(178) $(285)
(a) Current period changes also include the changes in fair value of new contracts entered into during the period, if any.
The decreasechange in the fair value positions of the energy-related derivative contracts for the year-endedyear ended December 31, 20082009 was $289an increase of $107 million, substantially all of which is due to natural gas positions. ThisThe change is attributable to both the volume of million British thermal units (mmBtu) and prices of natural gas. At December 31, 2008,2009, Southern Company had a net hedge volume of 148.9 billion cubic feet (Bcf)154 million mmBtu (includes location basis of 2 million mmBtu) with a weighted average contract cost approximately $1.97$1.17 per million British thermal units (mmBtu)mmBtu above market prices, compared to 99.0 Bcf149 million mmBtu (includes location basis of 2 million mmBtu) at December 31, 20072008 with a weighted average contract cost approximately $0.01$1.97 per mmBtu above market prices. The majority of the natural gas hedges are recorded through the traditional operating companies’ fuel cost recovery clauses.

II-35


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
At December 31, the net fair value of energy-related derivative contracts by hedge designation was reflected in the financial statements as assets/(liabilities) as follows:
            
Asset (Liability) Derivatives 2009 2008 
 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions) 
Regulatory hedges $(288) $  $(175) $(288)
Cash flow hedges  (1) 1   (2)  (1)
Non-accounting hedges 4 3 
Not designated  (1) 4 
Total fair value $(285) $4  $(178) $(285)
Energy-related derivative contracts which are designated as regulatory hedges relate to the traditional operating companies’ fuel hedging programs, where gains and losses are initially recorded as regulatory liabilities and assets, respectively, and then are included in fuel expense as they are recovered through the fuel cost recovery clauses. Gains and losses on energy-related derivatives designated as cash flow hedges are mainly used by Southern Power to hedge anticipated purchases and sales and are initially deferred in other comprehensive income before being recognized in income in the same period as the hedged transaction. Gains and losses on energy-related derivative contracts that are not designated or fail to qualify as hedges are recognized in the statements of income as incurred.
UnrealizedTotal net unrealized pre-tax gains/gains (losses) recognized in the statements of income for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007 for energy-related derivative contracts that are not hedges were not material for any year presented.

II-45


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company$(5) million, $1 million, and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
$3 million, respectively.
The maturities of the energy-related derivative contracts and the level of the fair value hierarchy in which they fall at December 31, 20082009 are as follows:
                
                 December 31, 2009
 December 31, 2008 Fair Value Measurements
 Fair Value Measurements Total Maturity
 Total Maturity Fair Value Year 1 Years 2&3 Years 4&5
 Fair Value Year 1 Years 2&3 Years 4&5
 (in millions) (in millions)
Level 1 $ $ $ $  $ $ $ $ 
Level 2  (285)  (203)  (77)  (5)  (178)  (113)  (65)  
Level 3          
Fair value of contracts outstanding at end of period $(285) $(203) $(77) $(5) $(178) $(113) $(65) $ 
As part of the adoption of FASB Statement No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” to increase consistency and comparability in fair value measurements and related disclosures, the table above now uses the three-tier fair value hierarchy, as discussed in Note 10 to the financial statements, as opposed to the previously used descriptions “actively quoted,” “external sources,” and “models and other methods.” The three-tier fair value hierarchy focuses on the fair value of the contract itself, whereas the previous descriptions focused on the source of the inputs. Because Southern Company uses over-the-counter contracts that are not exchange traded but are fair valued using prices which are actively quoted, and thus fall into Level 2. See Note 10 to the valuations of those contracts now appear in Level 2; previously they were shown as “actively quoted.”financial statements for further discussion on fair value measurement.
Southern Company is exposed to market price risk in the event of nonperformance by counterparties to energy-related and interest rate derivative contracts. Southern Company’s practice is to enterCompany only enters into agreements and material transactions with counterparties that have investment grade credit ratings by Moody’s and Standard & Poor’sS&P or with counterparties who have posted collateral to cover potential credit exposure. Therefore, Southern Company does not anticipate market risk exposure from nonperformance by the counterparties. For additional information, see NotesNote 1 and 6 to the financial statements under “Financial Instruments.”Instruments” and Note 11 to the financial statements.
Southern Company performs periodic reviews of its leveraged lease transactions, both domestic and international and the creditworthiness of the lessees, including a review of the value of the underlying leased assets and the credit ratings of the lessees. Southern Company’s domestic lease transactions generally do not have any credit enhancement mechanisms; however, the lessees in its international lease transactions have pledged various deposits as additional security to secure the obligations. The lessees in the Company’s international lease transactions are also required to provide additional collateral in the event of a credit downgrade below a certain level.
During 2006 and 2007, Southern Company had derivatives in place to reduce its exposure to a phase-out of certain income tax credits related to synthetic fuel production in 2007. In accordance with Internal Revenue Code Section 45K, these tax credits were subject to limitation as the annual average price of oil increased. Because these transactions were not designated as hedges, the gains and losses were recognized in the statements of income as incurred. These derivatives settled on January 1, 2008 and thus there was no income statement impact for the yearyears ended December 31, 2008.2008 and 2009. For 2007, and 2006, the unrealized fair value gain/(loss)gain recognized in other income/(expense)income to mark the transactions to market was $27 millionmillion.

II-36


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and $(32) million, respectively. For further information, see Notes 1 and 6 to the financial statements under “Financial Instruments.”Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Capital Requirements and Contractual Obligations
The construction program of Southern Company is currently estimated to be $5.7 billion for 2009, $5.1$4.9 billion for 2010, and $5.8$5.3 billion for 2011.2011, and $6.2 billion for 2012. These estimates include costs for new generation construction. Environmental expenditures included in these estimated amounts are $1.4 billion, $737$545 million, $721 million, and $871 million$1.2 billion for 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2011,2012, respectively. The construction programs are subject to periodic review and revision, and actual construction costs may vary from these estimates because of numerous factors. These factors include: changes in business conditions; changes in load projections; changes in environmental statutes and regulations; changes in nuclear plants to meet new regulatory requirements; changes in FERC rules and regulations; PSC approvals; changes in legislation; the cost and efficiency of construction labor, equipment, and materials; project scope and design changes; and the cost of capital. In addition, there can be no assurance that costs related to capital expenditures will be fully recovered.

II-46


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters – Georgia Power – Nuclear Construction” and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
“Retail Regulatory Matters – Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle” and Note 7 to the financial statements under “Construction Program” for additional information.
As a result of NRC requirements, Alabama Power and Georgia Power have external trust funds for nuclear decommissioning costs; however, Alabama Power currently has no additional funding requirements. For additional information, see Note 1 to the financial statements under “Nuclear Decommissioning.”
In addition, as discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements, Southern Company provides postretirement benefits to substantially all employees and funds trusts to the extent required by the traditional operating companies’ respective regulatory commissions.
Other funding requirements related to obligations associated with scheduled maturities of long-term debt, and preferred securities, as well as the related interest, derivative obligations, preferred and preference stock dividends, leases, and other purchase commitments are as follows. See Notes 1, 6, 7, and 711 to the financial statements for additional information.

II-47II-37


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
Contractual Obligations
                        
                         2011- 2013- After Uncertain  
 2010- 2012- After Uncertain   2010 2012 2014 2014 Timing(d) Total
 2009 2011 2013 2013 Timing(d) Total
 (in millions) (in millions)
Long-term debt(a)
  
Principal $617 $1,972 $2,745 $12,119 $ $17,453  $1,092 $2,880 $1,361 $13,836 $ $19,169 
Interest 858 1,616 1,424 11,102  15,000  894 1,732 1,455 11,905  15,986 
Preferred and preference stock dividends(b)
 65 130 130   325  65 130 130   325 
Other derivative obligations(c)
  
Energy-related 224 78 5   307  119 66    185 
Interest 21     21 
Operating leases 143 212 81 146  582  144 192 99 124  559 
Capital leases 21 26 11 40  98 
Unrecognized tax benefits and interest(d)
Unrecognized tax benefits and interest(d)
145    16 161  184    36 220 
Purchase commitments(e)
  
Capital(f)
 5,467 10,644    16,111  4,665 11,160    15,825 
Limestone(g)
 13 70 72 144  299  37 72 76 110  295 
Coal 4,608 5,999 2,602 3,421  16,630  4,490 4,707 1,913 2,508  13,618 
Nuclear fuel 187 301 275 43  806  271 323 231 297  1,122 
Natural gas(h)
 1,507 1,609 1,242 3,798  8,156  1,349 2,192 1,504 4,153  9,198 
Biomass fuel(i)
  17 35 128  180 
Purchased power 217 455 413 1,938  3,023  253 524 502 2,742  4,021 
Long-term service agreements(i)
 85 203 255 1,731  2,274 
Long-term service agreements(j)
 103 251 263 1,738  2,355 
Trusts —  
Nuclear decommissioning 3 7 7 53  70 
Postretirement benefits(j)
 56 116    172 
Nuclear decommissioning(k)
 3 7 7 53  70 
Postretirement benefits(l)
 43 76    119 
Total $14,216 $23,412 $9,251 $34,495 $16 $81,390  $13,733 $24,355 $7,587 $37,634 $36 $83,345 
(a) All amounts are reflected based on final maturity dates. Southern Company and its subsidiaries plan to continue to retire higher-cost securities and replace these obligations with lower-cost capital if market conditions permit. Variable rate interest obligations are estimated based on rates as of January 1, 2009,2010, as reflected in the statements of capitalization. Fixed rates include, where applicable, the effects of interest rate derivatives employed to manage interest rate risk. Excludes capital lease amounts (shown separately).
 
(b) Preferred and preference stock do not mature; therefore, amounts are provided for the next five years only.
 
(c) For additional information, see Notes 1 and 611 to the financial statements.
 
(d) The timing related to the $16realization of $36 million in unrecognized tax benefits and interest payments in individual years beyond 12 months cannot be reasonably and reliably estimated due to uncertainties in the timing of the effective settlement of tax positions. See Notes 3 and 5 to the financial statements for additional information.
 
(e) Southern Company generally does not enter into non-cancelable commitments for other operations and maintenance expenditures. Total other operations and maintenance expenses for 2009, 2008, and 2007 and 2006 were $3.5 billion, $3.8 billion, $3.7 billion, and $3.5$3.7 billion, respectively.
 
(f) Southern Company forecasts capital expenditures over a three-year period. Amounts represent current estimates of total expenditures excluding those amounts related to contractual purchase commitments for nuclear fuel. At December 31, 2008,2009, significant purchase commitments were outstanding in connection with the construction program.
 
(g) As part of Southern Company’s program to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions from its coal plants, the traditional operating companies have begun construction of flue gas desulfurization projects and have entered into various long-term commitments for the procurement of limestone to be used in suchflue gas desulfurization equipment.
 
(h) Natural gas purchase commitments are based on various indices at the time of delivery. Amounts reflected have been estimated based on the New York Mercantile Exchange future prices at December 31, 2008.2009.
 
(i)Biomass fuel commitments are based on minimum committed tonnage of wood waste purchases.
(j) Long-term service agreements include price escalation based on inflation indices.
 
(j)(k)Projections of nuclear decommissioning trust contributions are based on the 2007 Retail Rate Plan and are subject to change in Georgia Power’s 2010 retail rate case.
(l) Southern Company forecasts postretirement trust contributions over a three-year period. Southern Company expects that the earliest that cash may have to be contributed to the pension trust fund is 20112012 and such contribution could be significant; however, projections of the amount vary significantly depending on interpretations of and decisions related to federal legislation passed during 2008 as well as other key variables including future trust fund performance and cannot be determined at this time. Therefore, no amounts related to the pension trust fund are included in the table. See Note 2 to the financial statements for additional information related to the pension and postretirement plans, including estimated benefit payments. Certain benefit payments will be made through the related trusts. Other benefit payments will be made from Southern Company’s corporate assets.

II-48II-38


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
Southern Company’s 20082009 Annual Report contains forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements concerning the strategic goals for the wholesale business, retail sales, growth, customer growth, storm damage cost recovery and repairs, fuel cost recovery and other rate actions, environmental regulations and expenditures, earnings, growth, dividend payout ratios, access to sources of capital, projections for postretirement benefit and nuclear decommissioning trust contributions, financing activities, start and completion of construction projects, plans and estimated costs for new generation resources, impacts of adoption of new accounting rules, unrecognized tax benefits related to leveraged lease transactions,potential exemptions from ad valorem taxation of the Kemper IGCC project, impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, impact of healthcare legislation, if any, estimated sales and purchases under new power sale and purchase agreements, and estimated construction and other expenditures. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “could,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “projects,” “predicts,” “potential,” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other similar terminology. There are various factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those suggested by the forward-looking statements; accordingly, there can be no assurance that such indicated results will be realized. These factors include:
 the impact of recent and future federal and state regulatory change, including legislative and regulatory initiatives regarding deregulation and restructuring of the electric utility industry, implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, environmental laws including regulation of water quality and emissions of sulfur, nitrogen, mercury, carbon, soot, or particulate matter, or coal combustion byproducts and other substances, and also changes in tax and other laws and regulations to which Southern Company and its subsidiaries are subject, as well as changes in application of existing laws and regulations;
 
 current and future litigation, regulatory investigations, proceedings, or inquiries, including the pending EPA civil actions against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, FERC matters, IRS audits, and Mirant matters;
 
 the effects, extent, and timing of the entry of additional competition in the markets in which Southern Company’s subsidiaries operate;
 
 variations in demand for electricity, including those relating to weather, the general economy and recovery from the recent recession, population and business growth (and declines), and the effects of energy conservation measures;
 
 available sources and costs of fuels;
 
 effects of inflation;
 
 ability to control costs;costs and avoid cost overruns during the development and construction of facilities;
 
 investment performance of Southern Company’s employee benefit plans;plans and nuclear decommissioning trusts;
 
 advances in technology;
 
 state and federal rate regulations and the impact of pending and future rate cases and negotiations, including rate actions relating to fuel and storm restorationother cost recovery;recovery mechanisms;
 
 regulatory approvals and actions related to the potential Plant Vogtle expansion, including Georgia PSC and NRC approvals;approvals and potential DOE loan guarantees;
 
 the performance of projects undertaken by the non-utility businesses and the success of efforts to invest in and develop new opportunities;
 
 internal restructuring or other restructuring options that may be pursued;
 
 potential business strategies, including acquisitions or dispositions of assets or businesses, which cannot be assured to be completed or beneficial to Southern Company or its subsidiaries;
 
 the ability of counterparties of Southern Company and its subsidiaries to make payments as and when due and to perform as required;
 
 the ability to obtain new short- and long-term contracts with neighboring utilities and other wholesale customers;
 
 the direct or indirect effect on Southern Company’s business resulting from terrorist incidents and the threat of terrorist incidents;
 
 interest rate fluctuations and financial market conditions and the results of financing efforts, including Southern Company’s and its subsidiaries’ credit ratings;
 
 the ability of Southern Company and its subsidiaries to obtain additional generating capacity at competitive prices;
 
 catastrophic events such as fires, earthquakes, explosions, floods, hurricanes, droughts, pandemic health events such as an avian influenza,influenzas, or other similar occurrences;
 
 the direct or indirect effects on Southern Company’s business resulting from incidents similar toaffecting the August 2003 power outage in the Northeast;U.S. electric grid or operation of generating resources;
 
 the effect of accounting pronouncements issued periodically by standard setting bodies; and
 
 other factors discussed elsewhere herein and in other reports (including the Form 10-K) filed by the Company from time to time with the SEC.
Southern Company expressly disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

II-49II-39


CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007

Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
                        
 2008 2007 2006  2009 2008 2007 
 (in millions)  (in millions) 
Operating Revenues:
        
Retail revenues $14,055 $12,639 $11,801  $13,307 $14,055 $12,639 
Wholesale revenues 2,400 1,988 1,822  1,802 2,400 1,988 
Other electric revenues 545 513 465  533 545 513 
Other revenues 127 213 268  101 127 213 
Total operating revenues 17,127 15,353 14,356  15,743 17,127 15,353 
Operating Expenses:
  
Fuel 6,818 5,856 5,152  5,952 6,818 5,856 
Purchased power 815 515 543  474 815 515 
Other operations and maintenance 3,748 3,670 3,519  3,526 3,748 3,670 
MC Asset Recovery litigation settlement 202   
Depreciation and amortization 1,443 1,245 1,200  1,503 1,443 1,245 
Taxes other than income taxes 797 741 718  818 797 741 
Total operating expenses 13,621 12,027 11,132  12,475 13,621 12,027 
Operating Income
 3,506 3,326 3,224  3,268 3,506 3,326 
Other Income and (Expense):
  
Allowance for equity funds used during construction 152 106 50  200 152 106 
Interest income 33 45 41  23 33 45 
Equity in income (losses) of unconsolidated subsidiaries 11  (24)  (57)
Leveraged lease (losses) income  (85) 40 69 
Impairment loss on equity method investments    (16)
Equity in (losses) income of unconsolidated subsidiaries  (1) 11  (24)
Leveraged lease income (losses) 31  (85) 40 
Gain on disposition of lease termination 26   
Loss on extinguishment of debt  (17)   
Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized  (866)  (886)  (866)  (905)  (866)  (886)
Preferred and preference dividends of subsidiaries  (65)  (48)  (34)
Other income (expense), net  (29) 10  (58)  (21)  (29) 10 
Total other income and (expense)  (849)  (757)  (871)  (664)  (784)  (709)
Earnings Before Income Taxes
 2,657 2,569 2,353  2,604 2,722 2,617 
Income taxes 915 835 780  896 915 835 
Consolidated Net Income
 $1,742 $1,734 $1,573  1,708 1,807 1,782 
Dividends on Preferred and Preference Stock of Subsidiaries 65 65 48 
Consolidated Net Income After Dividends on Preferred and Preference Stock of Subsidiaries
 $1,643 $1,742 $1,734 
Common Stock Data:
  
Earnings per share— 
Basic $2.26 $2.29 $2.12 
Diluted 2.25 2.28 2.10 
Earnings per share (EPS)— 
Basic EPS $2.07 $2.26 $2.29 
Diluted EPS 2.06 2.25 2.28 
Average number of shares of common stock outstanding — (in millions)  
Basic 771 756 743  795 771 756 
Diluted 775 761 748  796 775 761 
Cash dividends paid per share of common stock $1.6625 $1.595 $1.535  $1.7325 $1.6625 $1.595 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-50II-40


CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007

Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
                        
 2008 2007 2006  2009 2008 2007 
 (in millions)  (in millions) 
Operating Activities:
        
Consolidated net income $1,742 $1,734 $1,573  $1,708 $1,807 $1,782 
Adjustments to reconcile consolidated net income to net cash provided from operating activities —  
Depreciation and amortization 1,704 1,486 1,421 
Deferred income taxes and investment tax credits 215 7 202 
Depreciation and amortization, total 1,788 1,704 1,486 
Deferred income taxes 25 215 7 
Deferred revenues 120  (2)  (1)  (54) 120  (2)
Allowance for equity funds used during construction  (152)  (106)  (50)  (200)  (152)  (106)
Equity in (income) losses of unconsolidated subsidiaries  (11) 24 57  1  (11) 24 
Leveraged lease losses (income) 85  (40)  (69)
Leveraged lease (income) losses  (31) 85  (40)
Gain on disposition of lease termination  (26)   
Loss on extinguishment of debt 17   
Pension, postretirement, and other employee benefits 21 39 46   (3) 21 39 
Stock based compensation expense 20 28 28  23 20 28 
Derivative fair value adjustments  (1)  (30) 32 
Hedge settlements 15 10 13   (19) 15 10 
Hurricane Katrina grant proceeds-property reserve  60  
Other, net  (97) 60 51  79  (97) 80 
Changes in certain current assets and liabilities —  
Receivables  (176) 165  (69)
Fossil fuel stock  (303)  (39)  (246)
Materials and supplies  (23)  (71) 7 
Other current assets  (36)  73 
Accounts payable  (74) 105  (173)
Hurricane Katrina grant proceeds  14 120 
Accrued taxes 293  (19)  (103)
Accrued compensation 36  (40)  (24)
Other current liabilities 20 10  (68)
-Receivables 585  (176) 165 
-Fossil fuel stock  (432)  (303)  (39)
-Materials and supplies  (39)  (23)  (71)
-Other current assets  (47)  (36)  
-Accounts payable  (125)  (74) 105 
-Accrued taxes  (95) 293  (19)
-Accrued compensation  (226) 36  (40)
-Other current liabilities 334 20 25 
Net cash provided from operating activities 3,398 3,395 2,820  3,263 3,464 3,434 
Investing Activities:
  
Property additions  (3,961)  (3,545)  (2,994)  (4,670)  (3,961)  (3,546)
Investment in restricted cash from pollution control bonds  (96)  (157)  
Distribution of restricted cash from pollution control bonds 69 78  
Investment in restricted cash from pollution control revenue bonds  (55)  (96)  (157)
Distribution of restricted cash from pollution control revenue bonds 119 69 78 
Nuclear decommissioning trust fund purchases  (720)  (783)  (751)  (1,234)  (720)  (783)
Nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales 712 775 743  1,228 712 775 
Proceeds from property sales 34 33 150  340 34 33 
Hurricane Katrina capital grant proceeds 7 35 153 
Investment in unconsolidated subsidiaries  (1)  (37)  (64)
Cost of removal net of salvage  (123)  (108)  (90)
Other  (47)  19 
Cost of removal, net of salvage  (119)  (123)  (108)
Change in construction payables 215 83 38 
Other investing activities  (143)  (124)  (39)
Net cash used for investing activities  (4,126)  (3,709)  (2,834)  (4,319)  (4,126)  (3,709)
Financing Activities:
  
Increase (decrease) in notes payable, net  (314)  (669) 683 
Decrease in notes payable, net  (306)  (314)  (669)
Proceeds —  
Long-term debt 3,686 3,826 1,564 
Long-term debt issuances 3,042 3,687 3,826 
Preferred and preference stock  470 150    470 
Common stock 474 538 137 
Common stock issuances 1,286 474 538 
Redemptions —  
Long-term debt  (1,469)  (2,566)  (1,366)  (1,234)  (1,469)  (2,565)
Preferred and preference stock  (125)   (15)
Redeemable preferred stock   (125)  
Payment of common stock dividends  (1,280)  (1,205)  (1,140)  (1,369)  (1,280)  (1,205)
Other  (28)  (46)  (34)
Payment of dividends on preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries  (65)  (66)  (40)
Other financing activities  (25)  (29)  (46)
Net cash provided from (used for) financing activities 944 348  (21)
Net cash provided from financing activities 1,329 878 309 
Net Change in Cash and Cash Equivalents
 216 34  (35) 273 216 34 
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Year
 201 167 202  417 201 167 
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Year
 $417 $201 $167  $690 $417 $201 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-51II-41


CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
At December 31, 20082009 and 20072008

Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
                
Assets 2008 2007  2009 2008 
 (in millions)  (in millions) 
Current Assets:
      
Cash and cash equivalents $417 $201  $690 $417 
Restricted cash 103 68 
Restricted cash and cash equivalents 43 103 
Receivables —  
Customer accounts receivable 1,054 1,000  953 1,054 
Unbilled revenues 320 294  394 320 
Under recovered regulatory clause revenues 646 716  333 646 
Other accounts and notes receivable 301 348  375 301 
Accumulated provision for uncollectible accounts  (26)  (22)  (25)  (26)
Fossil fuel stock, at average cost 1,018 710  1,447 1,018 
Materials and supplies, at average cost 757 725  794 757 
Vacation pay 140 135  145 140 
Prepaid expenses 302 146  508 302 
Other 326 411 
Other regulatory assets, current 167 275 
Other current assets 49 51 
Total current assets 5,358 4,732  5,873 5,358 
Property, Plant, and Equipment:
  
In service 50,618 47,176  53,588 50,618 
Less accumulated depreciation 18,286 17,413  19,121 18,286 
 32,332 29,763 
Plant in service, net of depreciation 34,467 32,332 
Nuclear fuel, at amortized cost 510 336  593 510 
Construction work in progress 3,036 3,228  4,170 3,036 
Total property, plant, and equipment 35,878 33,327  39,230 35,878 
Other Property and Investments:
  
Nuclear decommissioning trusts, at fair value 864 1,132  1,070 864 
Leveraged leases 897 984  610 897 
Other 227 238 
Miscellaneous property and investments 283 227 
Total other property and investments 1,988 2,354  1,963 1,988 
Deferred Charges and Other Assets:
  
Deferred charges related to income taxes 973 910  1,047 973 
Prepaid pension costs  2,369 
Unamortized debt issuance expense 208 191  208 208 
Unamortized loss on reacquired debt 271 289  255 271 
Deferred under recovered regulatory clause revenues 606 389  373 606 
Other regulatory assets 2,637 768 
Other 428 460 
Other regulatory assets, deferred 2,702 2,636 
Other deferred charges and assets 395 429 
Total deferred charges and other assets 5,123 5,376  4,980 5,123 
Total Assets
 $48,347 $45,789  $52,046 $48,347 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-52II-42


CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
At December 31, 20082009 and 20072008

Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
                
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity 2008 2007  2009 2008 
 (in millions)  (in millions) 
Current Liabilities:
      
Securities due within one year $617 $1,178  $1,113 $617 
Notes payable 953 1,272  639 953 
Accounts payable 1,250 1,214  1,329 1,250 
Customer deposits 302 274  331 302 
Accrued taxes —  
Income taxes 197 52 
Accrued income taxes 13 197 
Unrecognized tax benefits 131 165  166 131 
Other 396 330 
Other accrued taxes 398 396 
Accrued interest 196 218  218 196 
Accrued vacation pay 179 171  184 179 
Accrued compensation 447 408  248 447 
Liabilities from risk management activities 261 63  125 261 
Other 297 286 
Other regulatory liabilities, current 528 78 
Other current liabilities 292 219 
Total current liabilities 5,226 5,631  5,584 5,226 
Long-term Debt(See accompanying statements)
 16,816 14,143 
Long-Term Debt(See accompanying statements)
 18,131 16,816 
Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities:
  
Accumulated deferred income taxes 6,080 5,839  6,455 6,080 
Deferred credits related to income taxes 259 272  248 259 
Accumulated deferred investment tax credits 455 479  448 455 
Employee benefit obligations 2,057 1,492  2,304 2,057 
Asset retirement obligations 1,183 1,200  1,201 1,183 
Other cost of removal obligations 1,321 1,308  1,091 1,321 
Other regulatory liabilities 262 1,613 
Other 330 347 
Other regulatory liabilities, deferred 278 262 
Other deferred credits and liabilities 346 330 
Total deferred credits and other liabilities 11,947 12,550  12,371 11,947 
Total Liabilities
 33,989 32,324  36,086 33,989 
Preferred and Preference Stock of Subsidiaries(See accompanying statements)
 1,082 1,080 
Redeemable Preferred Stock of Subsidiaries(See accompanying statements)
 375 375 
Common Stockholders’ Equity(See accompanying statements)
 13,276 12,385 
Total Stockholders’ Equity(See accompanying statements)
 15,585 13,983 
Total Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
 $48,347 $45,789  $52,046 $48,347 
Commitments and Contingent Matters(See notes)
  
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-53II-43


CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CAPITALIZATION
At December 31, 20082009 and 20072008

Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
                                    
 2008 2007 2008 2007  2009 2008 2009 2008
 (in millions) (percent of total)  (in millions) (percent of total)
Long-Term Debt:
                     
Long-term debt payable to affiliated trusts —                     
Maturity
 Interest Rates                 Interest Rates 
2042 through 2044 5.50% to 5.88% $412  $412         
2044 5.88% $206 $206 
Variable rate (3.35% at 1/1/10) due 2042   206 206 
Total long-term debt payable to affiliated trusts   412 412 
Long-term senior notes and debt —                     
Maturity
 Interest Rates                 Interest Rates 
2008 2.54% to 7.00%     459         
2009 4.10% to 7.00%  128   127          4.10% to 7.00%  128 
2010 4.70%  102   102          4.70% 102 102 
2011 4.00% to 5.57%  303   302          4.00% to 5.57% 304 303 
2012 4.85% to 6.25%  1,778   1,478          4.85% to 6.25% 1,778 1,778 
2013 4.35% to 6.00%  936   236          4.35% to 6.00% 936 936 
2014 through 2048 4.88% to 8.20%  8,437   7,824         
Adjustable rates (at 1/1/09):                  
2008 4.94% to 5.00%     550         
2014 4.15% to 4.90% 425 75 
2015 through 2048 4.25% to 8.20% 9,847 8,362 
Adjustable rates (at 1/1/10):   
2009 2.3288% to 2.36%  440   440          2.3288% to 2.36%  440 
2010 2.42% to 6.10%  1,034   202          0.35% to 0.97% 990 1,034 
2011 1.645% to 2.35%  490             0.68% to 2.95% 790 490 
Total long-term senior notes and debtTotal long-term senior notes and debt  13,648   11,720            15,172 13,648 
Other long-term debt —                     
Pollution control revenue bonds —                     
Maturity
 Interest Rates                 Interest Rates 
2016 through 2048 1.95% to 6.00%  2,030   812          1.40% to 6.00% 1,973 2,030 
Variable rates (at 1/1/09):                  
2011 through 2041 0.80% to 3.00%  1,257   2,170         
Variable rates (at 1/1/10):   
2011 through 2049 0.18% to 0.44% 1,612 1,257 
Total other long-term debt    3,287   2,982            3,585 3,287 
Capitalized lease obligations    106   101            98 106 
Unamortized debt premium (discount), net    (20)  (19)        
Unamortized debt (discount), net    (23)  (20) 
Total long-term debt (annual interest requirement — $858 million)  17,433   15,196         
Total long-term debt (annual interest requirement — $894 million)   19,244 17,433 
Less amount due within one year    617   1,053            1,113 617 
Long-term debt excluding amount due within one yearLong-term debt excluding amount due within one year  16,816   14,143   53.9%  51.2%   18,131 16,816  53.2%  53.9%

II-54II-44


CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CAPITALIZATION(continued)
At December 31, 20082009 and 20072008
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
                                
 2008 2007 2008 2007  2009 2008 2009 2008
 (in millions) (percent of total)  (in millions) (percent of total)
     
Preferred and Preference Stock of Subsidiaries:
 
Redeemable Preferred Stock of Subsidiaries:
 
Cumulative preferred stock
  
$100 par or stated value — 4.20% to 5.44%  
Authorized — 20 million shares  
Outstanding — 1 million shares 81 81  81 81 
$1 par value — 4.95% to 5.83%  
Authorized — 28 million shares  
Outstanding — 12 million shares: $25 stated value 294 294  294 294 
Outstanding — 2008: 0 shares  123 
Outstanding — 2007: 1,250 shares: $100,000 stated capital 
Total redeemable preferred stock of subsidiaries
(annual dividend requirement — $20 million)
 375 375 1.1 1.2 
Common Stockholders’ Equity:
 
Common stock, par value $5 per share — 4,101 3,888 
Authorized — 1 billion shares 
Issued — 2009: 820 million shares 
— 2008: 778 million shares 
Treasury — 2009: 0.5 million shares 
— 2008: 0.4 million shares 
Paid-in capital 2,995 1,893 
Treasury, at cost  (15)  (12) 
Retained earnings 7,885 7,612 
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)  (88)  (105) 
Total common stockholders’ equity 14,878 13,276 43.6 42.6 
Preferred and Preference Stock of Subsidiaries:
 
Non-cumulative preferred stock
  
$25 par value — 6.00% to 6.13%  
Authorized — 60 million shares  
Outstanding — 2 million shares 45 45  45 45 
Preference stock
  
Authorized — 65 million shares  
Outstanding — $1 par value — 5.63% to 6.50% 343 343  343 343 
— 14 million shares (non-cumulative)  
— $100 par or stated value — 6.00% to 6.50% 319 319  319 319 
— 3 million shares (non-cumulative)  
Total preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries 
(annual dividend requirement — $65 million) 1,082 1,205 
Less amount due within one year  125 
Total preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries
(annual dividend requirement — $45 million)
 707 707 2.1 2.3 
Preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries excluding amount due within one year 1,082 1,080 3.5 3.9 
Common Stockholders’ Equity:
 
Common stock, par value $5 per share — 3,888 3,817 
Authorized — 1 billion shares 
Issued — 2008: 778 million shares 
— 2007: 764 million shares 
Treasury — 2008: 0.4 million shares 
— 2007: 0.4 million shares 
Paid-in capital 1,893 1,454 
Treasury, at cost  (12)  (11) 
Retained earnings 7,612 7,155 
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)  (105)  (30) 
Total common stockholders’ equity 13,276 12,385 42.6 44.9 
Total stockholders’ equity 15,585 13,983 
Total Capitalization
 $31,174 $27,608  100.0%  100.0% $34,091 $31,174  100.0%  100.0%
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-55II-45


CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMMON STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007

Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
                                                    
 Common Stock   Accumulated   Accumulated Preferred  
 Par Paid-In   Retained Other Comprehensive   Other and  
 Value Capital Treasury Earnings Income (Loss) Total Number of Common Stock Comprehensive Preference  
 (in millions) Common Shares Par Paid-In Retained Income Stock of  
Balance at December 31, 2005
 $3,759 $1,085 $(359) $6,332 $(128) $10,689 
Net income    1,573  1,573 
 Issued Treasury Value Capital Treasury Earnings (Loss) Subsidiaries Total
 (in thousands) (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2006
 751,864  (5,594) $3,759 $1,096 $(192) $6,765 $(57) $246 $11,617 
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries      1,734   1,734 
Other comprehensive income     19 19        27  27 
Adjustment to initially apply FASB Statement No. 158, net of tax     52 52 
Cumulative effect of new accounting standards (a)       (140)    (140)
Stock issued  11 168   179  11,639 5,255 58 356 183   461 1,058 
Cash dividends     (1,140)   (1,140)       (1,204)    (1,204)
Other    (1)    (1)   (60)  2  (2)     
Balance at December 31, 2006
 3,759 1,096  (192) 6,765  (57) 11,371 
Net income    1,734  1,734 
Balance at December 31, 2007
 763,503  (399) 3,817 1,454  (11) 7,155  (30) 707 13,092 
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries      1,742   1,742 
Other comprehensive income     27 27         (75)   (75)
Stock issued 58 356 183   597 
Adjustment to initially apply FIN 48, net of tax     (15)   (15)
Adjustment to initially apply FSP 13-2, net of tax     (125)   (125)
Cash dividends     (1,204)   (1,204)
Other  2  (2)    
Balance at December 31, 2007
 3,817 1,454  (11) 7,155  (30) 12,385 
Net income    1,742  1,742 
Other comprehensive loss      (75)  (75)
Stock issued 71 438    509  14,113  71 438     509 
Cash dividends     (1,279)   (1,279)       (1,279)    (1,279)
Other  1  (1)  (6)   (6)   (25)  1  (1)  (6)    (6)
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $3,888 $1,893 $(12) $7,612 $(105) $13,276  777,616  (424) 3,888 1,893  (12) 7,612  (105) 707 13,983 
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries      1,643   1,643 
Other comprehensive income       17  17 
Stock issued 42,536  213 1,100     1,313 
Cash dividends       (1,369)    (1,369)
Other   (81)  2  (3)  (1)    (2)
Balance at December 31, 2009
 820,152  (505) $4,101 $2,995 $(15) $7,885 $(88) $707 $15,585 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
(a) In 2007 Southern Company recorded two adjustments net of tax in respect of new accounting guidance; a $125 million adjustment in respect of leverage lease transactions and a $15 million adjustment in respect of uncertain tax positions.

II-46


CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007

Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
             
 
  2008  2007  2006 
  (in millions) 
Consolidated Net Income
 $1,742  $1,734  $1,573 
       
Other comprehensive income (loss):            
Qualifying hedges:            
Changes in fair value, net of tax of $(19), $(3), and $(5), respectively  (30)  (5)  (8)
Reclassification adjustment for amounts included in net income, net of tax of $7, $6, and $-, respectively  11   9   1 
Marketable securities:            
Changes in fair value, net of tax of $(4), $3, and $4, respectively  (7)  4   8 
Reclassification adjustment for amounts included in net income, net of tax of $-, $-, and $-, respectively     (1)   
Pension and other postretirement benefit plans:            
Benefit plan net gain (loss), net of tax of $(32), $13, and $-, respectively  (51)  20    
Additional prior service costs from amendment to non-qualified pension plans, net of tax of $-, $(2), and $-, respectively     (2)   
Change in additional minimum pension liability, net of tax of $-, $-, and $10, respectively        18 
Reclassification adjustment for amounts included in net income, net of tax of $1, $1, and $-, respectively  2   2    
 
Total other comprehensive income (loss)  (75)  27   19 
       
Consolidated Comprehensive Income
 $1,667  $1,761  $1,592 
       
             
 
  2009  2008  2007 
  (in millions)     
Consolidated Net Income
 $1,708  $1,807  $1,782 
 
Other comprehensive income:            
Qualifying hedges:            
Changes in fair value, net of tax of $(3), $(19), and $(3), respectively  (4)  (30)  (5)
Reclassification adjustment for amounts included in net income, net of tax of $18, $7, and $6, respectively  28   11   9 
Marketable securities:            
Change in fair value, net of tax of $1, $(4), and $3, respectively  4   (7)  4 
Reclassification adjustment for amounts included in net income, net of tax of$-, $-, and $-, respectively
        (1)
Pension and other postretirement benefit plans:            
Benefit plan net gain (loss),net of tax of $(8), $(32), and $13, respectively  (12)  (51)  20 
Additional prior service costs from amendment to non-qualified plans, net of tax of$-, $-, and $(2), respectively
        (2)
Reclassification adjustment for amounts included in net income, net of tax of $1, $1, and $1, respectively  1   2   2 
 
Total other comprehensive income (loss)  17   (75)  27 
 
Dividends on preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries  (65)  (65)  (48)
 
Consolidated Comprehensive Income
 $1,660  $1,667  $1,761 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-56II-47


NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
General
The Southern Company (the Company) is the parent company of four traditional operating companies, Southern Power Company (Southern Power), Southern Company Services, Inc. (SCS), Southern Communications Services, Inc. (SouthernLINC Wireless), Southern Company Holdings, Inc. (Southern Holdings), Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (Southern Nuclear), and other direct and indirect subsidiaries. The traditional operating companies, Alabama Power Company (Alabama Power), Georgia Power Company (Georgia Power), Gulf Power Company (Gulf Power), and Mississippi Power Company (Mississippi Power), are vertically integrated utilities providing electric service in four Southeastern states. Southern Power constructs, acquires, owns, and manages generation assets and sells electricity at market-based rates in the wholesale market. SCS, the system service company, provides, at cost, specialized services to Southern Company and theits subsidiary companies. SouthernLINC Wireless provides digital wireless communications for use by Southern Company and its subsidiary companies and also markets these services to the public and provides fiber cable services within the Southeast. Southern Holdings is an intermediate holding company subsidiary for Southern Company’s investments in leveraged leases and various other energy-related businesses.leases. Southern Nuclear operates and provides services to Southern Company’s nuclear power plants.
The financial statements reflect Southern Company’s investments in the subsidiaries on a consolidated basis. The equity method is used for entities in which the Company has significant influence but does not control and for variable interest entities where the Company is not the primary beneficiary. All material intercompany transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. Certain prior years’ data presented in the financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation.
The traditional operating companies, Southern Power, and certain of their subsidiaries are subject to regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the traditional operating companies are also subject to regulation by their respective state public service commissions (PSC). The companies follow accounting principles generally accepted in the United States and comply with the accounting policies and practices prescribed by their respective commissions. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires the use of estimates, and the actual results may differ from those estimates.
Reclassifications
Certain prior years’ data presented in the financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation. The consolidated statements of income for the prior periods presented have been modified within the operating expenses section to combine the line items “Other operations” and “Maintenance” into a single line item entitled “Other operations and maintenance.” The statements of cash flows for the prior periods presented were modified within the operating activities section to present a separate line item for “Deferred revenues” previously included in “Other, net.” The consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2007 has been modified within current liabilities to reflect the amount of “Unrecognized tax benefits” previously included within “Accrued taxes — Income taxes” and to present the amount of “Liabilities for risk management activities” previously included in “Other.” These reclassifications had no effect on total assets, net income, cash flows, or earnings per share.
Related Party Transactions
Alabama Power and Georgia Power purchased synthetic fuel from Alabama Fuel Products, LLC (AFP), an entity in which Southern Holdings held a 30% ownership interest until July 2006, when its ownership interest was terminated. Total fuel purchases for January 2006 through June 2006 were $354 million. Synfuel Services, Inc. (SSI), another subsidiary of Southern Holdings, provided fuel transportation services to AFP that were ultimately reflected in the cost of the synthetic fuel billed to Alabama Power and Georgia Power. In connection with these services, the related revenues of approximately $62 million for January 2006 through June 2006, have been eliminated against fuel expense in the financial statements. SSI also provided additional services to AFP, as well as

II-57


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
to a related party of AFP. Revenues from these transactions totaled approximately $24 million for January 2006 through June 2006.
Subsequent to the termination of Southern Company’s membership interest in AFP, Alabama Power and Georgia Power continued to purchase an additional $6 million $750 million, and $384$750 million in fuel from AFP in 2008 2007, and 2006,2007, respectively. SSI continued to provide fuel transportation services of $131 million in 2007, and $62 million in 2006, which were eliminated against fuel expense in the financial statements. SSI also provided other additional services to AFP and a related party of AFP totaling $47 million and $21 million in 2007 and 2006, respectively.2007. The synthetic fuel investments and related party transactions were terminated on December 31, 2007.

II-48


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Regulatory Assets and Liabilities
The traditional operating companies are subject to the provisions of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Statement No. 71, “Accountingin accounting for the Effectseffects of Certain Types of Regulation” (SFAS No. 71).rate regulation. Regulatory assets represent probable future revenues associated with certain costs that are expected to be recovered from customers through the ratemaking process. Regulatory liabilities represent probable future reductions in revenues associated with amounts that are expected to be credited to customers through the ratemaking process. Regulatory assets and (liabilities) reflected in the balance sheets at December 31 relate to:
                        
 2008 2007 Note 2009 2008 Note 
 (in millions) (in millions) 
Deferred income tax charges $972 $911  (a) $1,048 $972  (a)
Asset retirement obligations-asset 236 50  (a) 125 236  (a,i)
Asset retirement obligations-liability  (5)  (154)  (a)  (47)  (5)  (a,i)
Other cost of removal obligations  (1,321)  (1,308)  (a)  (1,307)  (1,321)  (a)
Deferred income tax credits  (260)  (275)  (a)  (249)  (260)  (a)
Loss on reacquired debt 271 289  (b) 255 271  (b)
Vacation pay 140 135  (c) 145 140  (c,i)
Under recovered regulatory clause revenues 432 371  (d) 40 432  (d)
Building lease 48 49  (d)
Over recovered regulatory clause revenues  (218)  (3)  (d)
Building leases 47 49  (f)
Generating plant outage costs 45 46  (d) 39 45  (d)
Under recovered storm damage costs 27 43  (d) 22 27  (d)
Property damage reserves  (97)  (90)  (d)  (157)  (97)  (h)
Fuel hedging (realized and unrealized) losses 314 25  (d)
Fuel hedging (realized and unrealized) gains  (10)  (20)  (d)
Fuel hedging-asset 187 314  (d)
Fuel hedging-liability  (2)  (10)  (d)
Other assets 164 88  (d) 156 163  (d)
Environmental remediation-asset 67 67  (d) 68 67  (h,i)
Environmental remediation-liability  (19)  (22)  (d)  (13)  (19)  (h)
Deferred purchased power  (156)  (20)  (d)
Environmental compliance cost recovery  (96)  (135)  (g)
Other liabilities  (25)  (21)  (d)  (51)  (43)  (j)
Overfunded retiree benefit plans   (1,288)  (e)
Underfunded retiree benefit plans 2,068 547  (e) 2,268 2,068  (e,i)
Total assets (liabilities), net $2,891 $(577)  $2,260 $2,891 
Note: The recovery and amortization periods for these regulatory assets and (liabilities) are as follows:
 
(a) Asset retirement and removal assets and liabilities are recorded, deferred income tax assets are recovered, other cost of removal, and deferred tax liabilities are amortized over the related property lives, which may range up to 65 years. Asset retirement and removal assets and liabilities will be settled and trued up following completion of the related activities. Other cost of removal obligations include $216 million at Georgia Power that may be amortized during 2010 in accordance with the August 27, 2009 Georgia PSC order. See Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Georgia Power — Cost of Removal” for additional information.
 
(b) Recovered over either the remaining life of the original issue or, if refinanced, over the life of the new issue, which may range up to 50 years.
 
(c) Recorded as earned by employees and recovered as paid, generally within one year.
 
(d) Recorded and recovered or amortized as approved by the appropriate state PSCs.PSCs over periods not exceeding 10 years.
 
(e) Recovered and amortized over the average remaining service period which may range up to 1415 years. See Note 2 for additional information.
(f)Recovered over the remaining lives of the buildings through 2026.
(g)This balance represents deferred revenue associated with Georgia Power’s environmental compliance cost recovery (ECCR) tariff established in its retail rate plan for the years 2008 through 2010 (2007 Retail Rate Plan). The recovery of the forecasted environmental compliance costs was levelized to collect equal annual amounts between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2010 under the tariff.
(h)Recovered as storm restoration or environmental remediation expenses are incurred.
(i)Not earning a return as offset in rate base by a corresponding asset or liability.
(j)Recorded and recovered or amortized as approved by the appropriate state PSC over periods up to the life of the plant or the remaining life of the original issue or, if refinanced, over the life of the new issue which may range up to 50 years.

II-58


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
In the event that a portion of a traditional operating company’s operations is no longer subject to the provisions of SFAS No. 71,applicable accounting rules for rate regulation, such company would be required to write off or reclassify to accumulated other comprehensive income related regulatory assets and liabilities that are not specifically recoverable through regulated rates. In addition, the traditional operating company would be required to determine if any impairment to other assets, including plant, exists and write down the assets, if impaired, to their fair values. All regulatory assets and liabilities are to be reflected in rates. See Note 3 under “Alabama Power Retail“Retail Regulatory Matters — Alabama Power,“Georgia Power Retail“Retail Regulatory Matters — Georgia Power,“Gulf Power Retailand “Retail Regulatory Matters” and “Storm Damage Cost Recovery” — Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle” for additional information.

II-49


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Revenues
Wholesale capacity revenues are generally recognized on a levelized basis over the appropriate contract periods. Energy and other revenues are recognized as services are provided. Unbilled revenues related to retail sales are accrued at the end of each fiscal period. Electric rates for the traditional operating companies include provisions to adjust billings for fluctuations in fuel costs, fuel hedging, the energy component of purchased power costs, and certain other costs. Revenues are adjusted for differences between these actual costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Under or over recovered regulatory clause revenues are recorded in the balance sheets and are recovered or returned to customers through adjustments to the billing factors.
Retail fuel cost recovery mechanisms vary by each traditional operating company, but in general, the process requires periodic filings with the appropriate state PSC. Alabama Power continuously monitors the under/over recovered balance and files for a revised fuel rate when management deems appropriate. Georgia Power is required to filefiled a new fuel case no later than March 1, 2009. On February 19, 2009, the Georgia PSC approved Georgia Power’s request to delay the filing of that case until March 13,on December 15, 2009. The new rates are expected to become effective on JuneApril 1, 2009.2010. Gulf Power is required to notify the Florida PSC if the projected fuel cost over or under recovery exceeds 10% of the projected fuel revenue applicable for the period and indicate if an adjustment to the fuel cost recovery factor is being requested. Mississippi Power is required to file for an adjustment to the fuel cost recovery factor annually. See Note 3 under “Alabama“Retail Regulatory Matters — Alabama Power Retail— Fuel Cost Recovery” and “Retail Regulatory Matters” “Georgia — Georgia Power Retail Regulatory Matters,” and “Gulf Power Retail Regulatory Matters”— Fuel Cost Recovery” for additional information.
Southern Company has a diversified base of customers. No single customer or industry comprises 10% or more of revenues. For all periods presented, uncollectible accounts averaged less than 1% of revenues.
Fuel Costs
Fuel costs are expensed as the fuel is used. Fuel expense generally includes the cost of purchased emissionemissions allowances as they are used. Fuel expense also includes the amortization of the cost of nuclear fuel and a charge, based on nuclear generation, for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel. See Note 3 under “Nuclear Fuel Disposal Costs” for additional information.
Income and Other Taxes
Southern Company uses the liability method of accounting for deferred income taxes and provides deferred income taxes for all significant income tax temporary differences. Investment tax credits utilized are deferred and amortized to income over the average life of the related property. Taxes that are collected from customers on behalf of governmental agencies to be remitted to these agencies are presented net on the statements of income.
In accordance with FASB Interpretation No. 48, “Accountingregulatory requirements, deferred investment tax credits (ITCs) for Uncertaintythe traditional operating companies are amortized over the lives of the related property with such amortization normally applied as a credit to reduce depreciation in Income Taxes” (FIN 48),the statements of income. Credits amortized in this manner amounted to $24 million in 2009, $23 million in 2008, and $23 million in 2007. At December 31, 2009, all ITCs available to reduce federal income taxes payable had been utilized.
Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, certain renewable projects at Southern Company’s non-regulated subsidiaries are eligible for ITCs or cash grants. These non-regulated companies have elected to receive ITCs. The credits are recorded as a deferred credit, which will be amortized over the life of the asset, and the tax basis of the asset is reduced by 50% of the credits received, resulting in a deferred tax asset. The non-regulated companies have elected to recognize the tax benefit of this basis difference as a reduction to income tax expense as costs are incurred during the construction period. This basis difference will reverse and be recorded to income tax expense over the useful life of the asset once placed in service.
In accordance with accounting standards related to the uncertainty in income taxes, Southern Company recognizes tax positions that are “more likely than not” of being sustained upon examination by the appropriate taxing authorities. See Note 5 under “Unrecognized Tax Benefits” for additional information on FIN 48.

II-59


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
information.
Property, Plant, and Equipment
Property, plant, and equipment is stated at original cost less regulatory disallowances and impairments. Original cost includes: materials; labor; minor items of property; appropriate administrative and general costs; payroll-related costs such as taxes, pensions, and other benefits; and the interest capitalized and/or cost of funds used during construction.

II-50


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Southern Company’s property, plant, and equipment consisted of the following at December 31:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008 
 (in millions) (in millions) 
Generation $26,154 $23,879  $28,204 $26,154 
Transmission 7,085 6,761  7,380 7,085 
Distribution 13,856 13,134  14,335 13,856 
General 2,750 2,619  2,917 2,750 
Plant acquisition adjustment 43 43  43 43 
Utility plant in service 49,888 46,436  52,879 49,888 
IT equipment and software 240 230  182 240 
Communications equipment 450 452  423 450 
Other 40 58  104 40 
Other plant in service 730 740  709 730 
Total plant in service $50,618 $47,176  $53,588 $50,618 
The cost of replacements of property, exclusive of minor items of property, is capitalized. The cost of maintenance, repairs, and replacement of minor items of property is charged to maintenance expense as incurred or performed with the exception of nuclear refueling costs, which are recorded in accordance with specific state PSC orders. Alabama Power accrues estimated nuclear refueling costs in advance of the unit’s next refueling outage. Georgia Power defers and amortizes nuclear refueling costs over the unit’s operating cycle before the next refueling. The refueling cycles for Alabama Power and Georgia Power range from 18 to 24 months for each unit. In accordance with a Georgia PSC order, Georgia Power also defers the costs of certain significant inspection costs for the combustion turbines at Plant McIntosh and amortizes such costs over 10 years, which approximates the expected maintenance cycle.
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation of the original cost of utility plant in service is provided primarily by using composite straight-line rates, which approximated 3.2% in 2008, 3.0%2009, 3.2% in 2007,2008, and 3.0% in 2006.2007. Depreciation studies are conducted periodically to update the composite rates. These studies are filed with the respective state PSC for the traditional operating companies. Accumulated depreciation for utility plant in service totaled $17.9$18.7 billion and $17.0$17.9 billion at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, respectively. When property subject to composite depreciation is retired or otherwise disposed of in the normal course of business, its original cost, together with the cost of removal, less salvage, is charged to accumulated depreciation. For other property dispositions, the applicable cost and accumulated depreciation is removed from the balance sheet accounts and a gain or loss is recognized. Minor items of property included in the original cost of the plant are retired when the related property unit is retired.
Under Georgia Power’s retail rate plan for the three years ended December 31, 2007 (2004 Retail Rate Plan), Georgia Power was ordered to recognize Georgia PSC-certified capacity costs in rates evenly over the three years covered by the 2004 Retail Rate Plan. Georgia Power recorded credits to amortization of $19 million and $14in 2007. The 2007 Retail Rate Plan did not include a similar order. On August 27, 2009, the Georgia PSC approved an accounting order allowing Georgia Power to amortize up to $324 million in 2007 and 2006, respectively.of its regulatory liability related to other cost of removal obligations. See Note 3 under “Georgia“Retail Regulatory Matters — Georgia Power Retail Regulatory Matters”— Cost of Removal” for additional information.

II-60


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
In May 2004, the Mississippi PSC approved Mississippi Power’s request to reclassify 266 megawatts (MWs) of Plant Daniel unitsUnits 3 and 4 capacity to jurisdictional cost of service effective January 1, 2004 and authorized Mississippi Power to include the related costs and revenue credits in jurisdictional rate base, cost of service, and revenue requirement calculations for purposes of retail rate recovery. Mississippi Power amortized the related regulatory liability, pursuant to the Mississippi PSC’s order, as follows:by $6 million in 2007 and $13 million in 2006, resulting in increasesan increase to earnings in each of those years.that year.
Depreciation of the original cost of other plant in service is provided primarily on a straight-line basis over estimated useful lives ranging from 3three to 2530 years. Accumulated depreciation for other plant in service totaled $433$419 million and $429$433 million at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, respectively.
Asset Retirement Obligations and Other Costs of Removal
Asset retirement obligations are computed as the present value of the ultimate costs for an asset’s future retirement and are recorded in the period in which the liability is incurred. The costs are capitalized as part of the related long-lived asset and depreciated over the asset’s useful life. The Company has received accounting guidance from the various state PSCs allowing the continued accrual of

II-51


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
other future retirement costs for long-lived assets that the Company does not have a legal obligation to retire. Accordingly, the accumulated removal costs for these obligations will continue to beare reflected in the balance sheets as a regulatory liability. See Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Georgia Power — Cost of Removal” for additional information related to Georgia Power’s cost of removal regulatory liability.
The liability recognized to retire long-lived assets primarily relates to the Company’s nuclear facilities, Plants Farley, Hatch, and Vogtle. The fair value of assets legally restricted for settling retirement obligations related to nuclear facilities as of December 31, 20082009 was $864 million.$1.1 billion. In addition, the Company has retirement obligations related to various landfill sites, underground storage tanks, asbestos removal, and disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls in certain transformers. The Company also has identified retirement obligations related to certain transmission and distribution facilities, co-generation facilities, certain wireless communication towers, and certain structures authorized by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. However, liabilities for the removal of these assets have not been recorded because the range of time over which the Company may settle these obligations is unknown and cannot be reasonably estimated. The Company will continue to recognize in the statements of income allowed removal costs in accordance with its regulatory treatment. Any differences between costs recognized under FASB Statement No. 143 “Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations”in accordance with accounting standards related to asset retirement and FASB Interpretation No. 47, “Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations”environmental obligations, and those reflected in rates are recognized as either a regulatory asset or liability, as ordered by the various state PSCs, and are reflected in the balance sheets. See “Nuclear Decommissioning” herein for further information on amounts included in rates.
Details of the asset retirement obligations included in the balance sheets are as follows:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008 
 (in millions) (in millions) 
Balance beginning of year $1,203 $1,137  $1,185 $1,203 
Liabilities incurred 4 1  2 4 
Liabilities settled  (4)  (8)  (10)  (4)
Accretion 75 74  77 75 
Cash flow revisions  (93)  (1)  (48)  (93)
Balance end of year $1,185 $1,203  $1,206 $1,185 
Nuclear Decommissioning
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requires licensees of commercial nuclear power reactors to establish a plan for providing reasonable assurance of funds for future decommissioning. Alabama Power and Georgia Power have external trust funds (the Funds) to comply with the NRC’s regulations. Use of the Funds is restricted to

II-61


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
nuclear decommissioning activities and the Funds are managed and invested in accordance with applicable requirements of various regulatory bodies, including the NRC, the FERC, and state PSCs, as well as the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The Funds are investedrequired to be held by one or more trustees with an individual net worth of at least $100 million. The FERC requires the Funds’ managers to exercise the standard of care in investing that a tax-efficient manner“prudent investor” would use in a diversified mixthe same circumstances. The FERC regulations also require, except for investments tied to market indices or other mutual funds, that the Funds’ managers may not invest in any securities of equity and fixed incomethe utility for which it manages funds or its affiliates. In addition, the NRC prohibits investments in securities and are reported as of December 31, 2008 as trading securities pursuant to FASB Statement No. 115, “Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities” (SFAS No. 115).
On January 1, 2008, the Company adopted FASB Statement No. 159, “Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities – Including an Amendment of FASB Statement No. 115” (SFAS No. 159). This standard permits an entity to choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other items at fair value.power reactor licensees. While Southern Company electedis allowed to prescribe an overall investment policy to the fair value option only for investment securities heldFunds’ managers, neither Southern Company nor its subsidiaries or affiliates are allowed to engage in the Funds. The Funds are included in the balance sheets at fair value, as disclosed in Note 10.
Management elected to continue to recordday-to-day management of the Funds at fair value because management believes that fair value best represents the nature of the Funds. Management has delegated day-to-dayor to mandate individual investment decisions. Day-to-day management of the investments in the Funds is delegated to unrelated third party managers with oversight by Southern Company, Alabama Power, and Georgia Power management. The Funds’ managers of the Funds are authorized, within broad limits, to actively buy and sell securities at their own discretion in order to maximize the investment return on the Funds’ investments. BecauseThe Funds are invested in a tax-efficient manner in a diversified mix of equity and fixed income securities and are reported as trading securities.
Southern Company records the Company’s inability to choose to holdinvestment securities that have experienced unrealized losses until recovery of theirheld in the Funds at fair value, all unrealized losses incurred during 2006 and 2007, prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 159, were considered other-than-temporary impairments under SFAS No. 115.
The adoption of SFAS No. 159 had no impact on the results of operations, cash flows, or financial condition of the Company. For all periods presented, all gainsas disclosed in Note 10. Gains and losses, whether realized, unrealized, or identified as other-than-temporary, have been and will continue to beare recorded in the regulatory liability for asset retirement obligations in the balance sheets and are not included in net income or other comprehensive income. Fair value adjustments, realized gains, and other-than-temporary impairment losses are determined on a specific identification basis.
At December 31, 2009, investment securities in the Funds totaled $1.1 billion consisting of equity securities of $774 million, debt securities of $272 million, and $22 million of other securities. At December 31, 2008, investment securities in the Funds totaled $862 million consisting of equity securities of $518 million, debt securities of $323 million, and $21 million of other securities. These amounts exclude receivables related to investment income and pending investment sales, and payables related to pending investment purchases.

II-52


At December 31, 2007, investment securities in the Funds totaled $1.1 billion consisting of equity securities of $788 million, debt securities of $312 million,
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and $32 million of other securities. Unrealized gains were $256 million for equity securities and $12 million for debt securities. Other-than-temporary impairments were $(28) million for equity securities and $(5) million for debt securities.Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Sales of the securities held in the Funds resulted in cash proceeds of $1.2 billion, $712 million, and $775 million in 2009, 2008, and $743 million, in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively, all of which were re-invested.reinvested. For 2008,2009, fair value reductions,increases, including reinvested interest and dividends was $(278)and excluding expenses, were $215 million, of which $(259)$198 million related to securities held in the Funds at December 31, 2008.2009. For 2008, fair value reductions, including reinvested interest and dividends and excluding expenses, were $(278) million. Realized gains and other-than-temporary impairment losses were $78 million and $(76) million, respectively, in 2007 and $40 million and $(30) million, respectively, in 2006.2007. While the investment securities held in the Funds are reported as trading securities, the Funds continue to be managed with a long-term focus. Accordingly, all purchases and sales within the Funds are presented separately in the statement of cash flows as investing cash flows, consistent with the nature of and purpose for which the securities were acquired.
Amounts previously recorded in internal reserves are being transferred into the external trust funds over periods approved by the respective state PSCs.Alabama PSC. The NRC’s minimum external funding requirements are based on a generic estimate of the cost to decommission only the radioactive portions of a nuclear unit based on the size and type of reactor. Alabama Power and Georgia Power have filed plans with the NRC designed to ensure that, over time, the deposits and earnings of the external trust funds will provide the minimum funding amounts prescribed by the NRC.

II-62


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
At December 31, 2008,2009, the accumulated provisions for decommissioning were as follows:
                        
 Plant Farley Plant Hatch Plant Vogtle Plant Farley Plant Hatch Plant Vogtle
 (in millions) (in millions) 
External trust funds $404 $280 $168  $490 $360 $206 
Internal reserves 26    25   
Total $430 $280 $168  $515 $360 $206 
Site study cost is the estimate to decommission a specific facility as of the site study year. The estimated costs of decommissioning based on the most current studies, which were performed in 2008 for Plant Farley and in 20062009 for the Georgia Power plants, were as follows for Alabama Power’s Plant Farley and Georgia Power’s ownership interests in Plants Hatch and Vogtle:
            
 Plant Farley Plant Hatch Plant Vogtle            
 Plant Farley Plant Hatch Plant Vogtle
Decommissioning periods:    
Beginning year 2037 2034 2027  2037 2034 2047 
Completion year 2065 2061 2051  2065 2063 2067 
 (in millions)
 (in millions) 
Site study costs:   
Radiated structures $1,060 $544 $507  $1,060 $583 $500 
Non-radiated structures 72 46 67  72 46 71 
Total $1,132 $590 $574  $1,132 $629 $571 
The decommissioning periods and site study costs for Plant Vogtle reflect the extended operating license approved by the NRC on June 3, 2009. The decommissioning cost estimates are based on prompt dismantlement and removal of the plant from service. The actual decommissioning costs may vary from the above estimates because of changes in the assumed date of decommissioning, changes in NRC requirements, or changes in the assumptions used in making these estimates.
For ratemaking purposes, Alabama Power’s decommissioning costs are based on the site study, and Georgia Power’s decommissioning costs are based on the NRC generic estimate to decommission the radioactive portion of the facilities as of 2006. The estimates used in current rates are $495$531 million and $334$366 million for Plants Hatch and Vogtle, respectively. Amounts expensed were $3 million inannually for 2009 and 2008 and $7 million annually for 2007 and 2006 for Plant Vogtle. Significant assumptions used to determine these costs for ratemaking were an inflation rate of 4.5% and 2.9% for Alabama Power and Georgia Power, respectively, and a trust earnings rate of 7.0% and 4.9% for Alabama Power and Georgia Power, respectively. As a result of license extensions, amounts previously contributed to the external trust funds for Plants Hatch and Farley are currently projected to be adequate to meet the decommissioning obligations. Georgia Power filed an application with the NRC in June 2007 to extend the licenses for Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2 for an additional 20 years. Georgia Power anticipates the NRC may make a decision regarding the license extension for Plant Vogtle in 2009.
Allowance for Funds Used During Construction (AFUDC) and Interest Capitalized
In accordance with regulatory treatment, the traditional operating companies record AFUDC, which represents the estimated debt and equity costs of capital funds that are necessary to finance the construction of new regulated facilities. While cash is not realized currently from such allowance, it increases the revenue requirement over the service life of the plant through a higher rate base and higher depreciation expense.depreciation. The equity component of AFUDC is not included in calculating taxable income. Interest related to the construction of new facilities not included in the traditional operating companies’ regulated rates is capitalized in accordance with

II-53


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
standard interest capitalization requirements. AFUDC and interest capitalized, net of income taxes were 11.2%15.3%, 8.4%11.2%, and 4.2%8.4% of net income for 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006,2007, respectively.
Cash payments for interest totaled $788 million, $787 million, and $798 million in 2009, 2008, and $875 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively, net of amounts capitalized of $84 million, $71 million, and $64 million, and $27 million, respectively.

II-63


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets and Intangibles
Southern Company evaluates long-lived assets for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of such assets may not be recoverable. The determination of whether an impairment has occurred is based on either a specific regulatory disallowance or an estimate of undiscounted future cash flows attributable to the assets, as compared with the carrying value of the assets. If an impairment has occurred, the amount of the impairment recognized is determined by either the amount of regulatory disallowance or by estimating the fair value of the assets and recording a loss if the carrying value is greater than the fair value. For assets identified as held for sale, the carrying value is compared to the estimated fair value less the cost to sell in order to determine if an impairment loss is required. Until the assets are disposed of, their estimated fair value is re-evaluated when circumstances or events change.
Storm Damage Reserves
Each traditional operating company maintains a reserve to cover the cost of damages from major storms to its transmission and distribution lines and generally the cost of uninsured damages to its generation facilities and other property. In accordance with their respective state PSC orders, the traditional operating companies accrued $40.4$44 million in 2008.2009. Alabama Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power also have discretionary authority from their state PSCs to accrue certain additional amounts as circumstances warrant. In 2009, such additional accruals totaled $40 million. There were no material accruals for any year presented. See Note 3 under “Storm Damage Cost Recovery” for additional information regarding these reserves and the deferral of additional costs, as well as additional rate riders2008 or other cost recovery mechanisms which have been approved by the respective state PSCs to recover the deferred costs and accrue reserves for future storms.2007.
Leveraged Leases
Southern Company has several leveraged lease agreements, with terms ranging up to 45 years, which relate to international and domestic energy generation, distribution, and transportation assets. Southern Company receives federal income tax deductions for depreciation and amortization, as well as interest on long-term debt related to these investments. The Company reviews all important lease assumptions at least annually, or more frequently if events or changes in circumstances indicate that a change in assumptions has occurred or may occur. These assumptions include the effective tax rate, the residual value, the credit quality of the lessees, and the timing of expected tax cash flows.
Southern Company’s net investment in domestic leveraged leases consists of the following at December 31:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 (in millions) (in millions)
Net rentals receivable $492 $494  $487 $492 
Unearned income  (230)  (244)  (218)  (230)
Investment in leveraged leases  262  250  269 262 
Deferred taxes from leveraged leases  (189)  (163)  (211)  (189)
Net investment in leveraged leases $73 $87  $58 $73 
A summary of the components of income from domestic leveraged leases was as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
Pretax leveraged lease income $14 $16 $20  $12 $14 $16 
Income tax expense  (6)  (7)  (9)  (5)  (6)  (7)
Net leveraged lease income $8 $9 $11  $7 $8 $9 

II-64II-54


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
Southern Company’s net investment in international leveraged leases consists of the following at December 31:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 (in millions) (in millions)
Net rentals receivable $1,298 $1,298  $734 $1,298 
Unearned income  (663)  (563)  (393)  (663)
Investment in leveraged leases 635 735  341 635 
Current taxes payable  (120)     (120)
Deferred taxes from leveraged leases  (117)  (316)  (40)  (117)
Net investment in leveraged leases $398 $419  $301 $398 
A summary of the components of income from international leveraged leases was as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
Pretax leveraged lease income (loss) $(99) $24 $49  $19 $(99) $24 
Income tax benefit (expense) 35  (8)  (17)  (7) 35  (8)
Net leveraged lease income (loss) $(64) $16 $32  $12 $(64) $16 
See Note 3 under “Income Tax Matters” for additional information regarding theThe Company terminated two international leveraged lease transactions.investments during 2009. The proceeds were used to extinguish all debt related to leveraged lease investments, a portion of which had make-whole redemption provisions. This resulted in a $17 million loss which partially offset a $26 million gain on the terminations.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
For purposes of the financial statements, temporary cash investments are considered cash equivalents. Temporary cash investments are securities with original maturities of 90 days or less.
Materials and Supplies
Generally, materials and supplies include the average costs of transmission, distribution, and generating plant materials. Materials are charged to inventory when purchased and then expensed or capitalized to plant, as appropriate, at weighted average cost when installed.
Fuel Inventory
Fuel inventory includes the average costs of oil, coal, natural gas, and emissionemissions allowances. Fuel is charged to inventory when purchased and then expensed as used and recovered by the traditional operating companies through fuel cost recovery rates approved by each state PSC. EmissionEmissions allowances granted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are included in inventory at zero cost.
Financial Instruments
Southern Company uses derivative financial instruments to limit exposure to fluctuations in interest rates, the prices of certain fuel purchases, and electricity purchases and sales. All derivative financial instruments are recognized as either assets or liabilities (categorized(included in “Other” or shown separately as “Risk Management Activities”) and are measured at fair value. See Note 10 for additional information. Substantially all of Southern Company’s bulk energy purchases and sales contracts that meet the definition of a derivative are exemptexcluded from fair value accounting requirements because they qualify for the “normal” scope exception, and are accounted for under the accrual method. Other derivative contracts qualify as cash flow hedges of anticipated transactions or are recoverable through the traditional operating companies’ fuel hedging programs. This results in the deferral of related gains and losses in other comprehensive income or regulatory assets and liabilities, respectively, until the hedged transactions occur. Any ineffectiveness arising from cash flow hedges is recognized currently in net income. Other derivative contracts, including derivatives related to synthetic fuel

II-65


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
investments, are marked to market through current period income and are recorded on a net basis in the statements of income. See Note 6 under “Financial Instruments”11 for additional information.

II-55


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
The Company does not offset fair value amounts recognized for multiple derivative instruments executed with the same counterparty under a master netting arrangement. At December 31, 2008,2009, the amount included in “Accounts payable” in the balance sheets that the Company has recognized $8.5 million for the obligation to return cash collateral arising from derivative instruments which is included in “Accounts payable” in the balance sheets.was not material.
Southern Company is exposed to losses related to financial instruments in the event of counterparties’ nonperformance. The Company has established controls to determine and monitor the creditworthiness of counterparties in order to mitigate the Company’s exposure to counterparty credit risk.
The other Southern Company financial instruments for which the carrying amount did not equal fair value at December 31 were as follows:
         
  Carrying Amount Fair Value
  (in millions)
Long-term debt:        
2008
 $17,327  $17,114 
2007 $15,095  $14,931 
The fair values were based on either closing market prices (Level 1) or closing prices of comparable instruments (Level 2). See Note 10 for all other items recognized at fair value in the financial statements.
Comprehensive Income
The objective of comprehensive income is to report a measure of all changes in common stock equity of an enterprise that result from transactions and other economic events of the period other than transactions with owners. Comprehensive income consists of net income, changes in the fair value of qualifying cash flow hedges and marketable securities, and certain changes in pension and other post retirementpostretirement benefit plans, less income taxes and reclassifications for amounts included in net income.
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) balances, net of tax effects, were as follows:
                                
 Pension and Other Accumulated Other Pension and Other Accumulated Other
 Qualifying Marketable Postretirement Comprehensive Qualifying Marketable Postretirement Comprehensive
 Hedges Securities Benefit Plans Income (Loss) Hedges Securities Benefit Plans Income (Loss)
 (in millions)  (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2007 $(54) $13 $11 $(30)
Balance at December 31, 2008 $(73) $6 $(38) $(105)
Current period change  (19)  (7)  (49)  (75) 24 4  (11) 17 
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $(73) $6 $(38) $(105)
Balance at December 31, 2009
 $(49) $10 $(49) $(88)
Variable Interest Entities
The primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity must consolidate the related assets and liabilities. Southern Company hasCertain of the traditional operating companies have established certain wholly-owned trusts to issue preferred securities. See Note 6 under “Long-Term Debt Payable to Affiliated Trusts” for additional information. However, Southern Company and the applicable traditional operating companies are not considered the primary beneficiaries of the trusts. Therefore, the investments in these trusts are reflected as Other Investments, and the related loans from the trusts are included in Long-term Debt in the balance sheets.

II-66


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
2. RETIREMENT BENEFITS
Southern Company has a defined benefit, trusteed, pension plan covering substantially all employees. The plan is funded in accordance with requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (ERISA). No contributions to the plan are expected for the year ending December 31, 2009.2010. Southern Company also provides certain defined benefit pension plans for a selected group of management and highly compensated employees. Benefits under these non-qualified pension plans are funded on a cash basis. In addition, Southern Company provides certain medical care and life insurance benefits for retired employees through other postretirement benefit plans. The traditional operating companies fund related trusts to the extent required by their respective regulatory commissions. For the year ending December 31, 2009,2010, postretirement trust contributions are expected to total approximately $56$43 million.
The measurement date for plan assets and obligations for 2009 and 2008 was December 31 while the measurement date for prior years was September 30. Pursuant to FASB Statement No. 158, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans” (SFAS No. 158),accounting standards related to defined postretirement benefit plans, Southern Company was required to change the measurement date for its defined postretirement benefit postretirement plans from September 30 to December 31 beginning with the year ended December 31, 2008. As permitted, Southern Company adopted the measurement date provisions of SFAS No. 158 effective January 1, 2008, resulting in an increase in long-term liabilities of approximately $28 million and an increase in prepaid pension costs of approximately $16 million.

II-56


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Pension Plans
The total accumulated benefit obligation for the pension plans was $6.3 billion in 2009 and $5.5 billion in 2008 and $5.3 billion in 2007.2008. Changes during the plan year ended December 31, 2009 and the 15-month period ended December 31, 2008 and the 12-month period ended September 30, 2007 in the projected benefit obligations and the fair value of plan assets were as follows:
                
 2008 2007  2009 2008 
 (in millions)  (in millions)
Change in benefit obligation
         
Benefit obligation at beginning of year $5,660 $5,491  $5,879  $5,660 
Service cost 182  147   146   182 
Interest cost 435  324   387   435 
Benefits paid  (324)  (241)  (282)  (324)
Plan amendments  50 
Actuarial gain  (74)  (111)
Actuarial loss (gain)  628   (74)
Balance at end of year 5,879 5,660   6,758   5,879 
Change in plan assets
         
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year 7,624 6,693   5,093   7,624 
Actual return (loss) on plan assets  (2,234) 1,153   792   (2,234)
Employer contributions 27 19   24   27 
Benefits paid  (324)  (241)  (282)  (324)
Fair value of plan assets at end of year 5,093 7,624   5,627   5,093 
Funded status at end of year  (786) 1,964 
Fourth quarter contributions  5 
Accrued liability $(1,131) $(786)
(Accrued liability) prepaid pension asset $(786) $1,969 
At December 31, 2008,2009, the projected benefit obligations for the qualified and non-qualified pension plans were $5.5$6.3 billion and $0.4 billion, respectively. All pension plan assets are related to the qualified pension plan.

II-67


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Pension plan assets are managed and invested in accordance with all applicable requirements, including ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Internal Revenue Code). In 2009, in determining the optimal asset allocation for the pension fund, the Company performed an extensive study based on projections of both assets and liabilities over a 10-year forward horizon. The primary goal of the study was to maximize plan funded status. The Company’s investment policy covers a diversified mix of assets, including equity and fixed income securities, real estate, and private equity. Derivative instruments are used primarily as hedging tools but may also be used to gain efficient exposure to the various asset classes.classes and as hedging tools. The Company primarily minimizes the risk of large losses primarily through diversification but also monitors and manages other aspects of risk. The actual composition of the Company’s pension plan assets as of the end of year,December 31, 2009 and 2008, along with the targeted mix of assets, is presented below:
            
 Target 2008 2007            
 Target 2009 2008 
Domestic equity  36%  34%  38%  29%  33%  34%
International equity 24 23 24  28 29 23 
Fixed income 15 14 15  15 15 14 
Real estate 15 19 16 
Special situations 3   
Real estate investments 15 13 19 
Private equity 10 10 7  10 10 10 
Total  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%
The investment strategy for plan assets related to the Company’s defined benefit plan is to be broadly diversified across major asset classes. The asset allocation is established after consideration of various factors that affect the assets and liabilities of the pension plan including, but not limited to, historical and expected returns, volatility, correlations of asset classes, the current level of assets and liabilities, and the assumed growth in assets and liabilities. Because a significant portion of the liability of the pension plan is long-term in nature, the assets are invested consistent with long-term investment expectations for return and risk. To manage the actual asset class exposures relative to the target asset allocation, the Company employs a formal rebalancing program. As additional risk management, external investment managers and service providers are subject to written guidelines to ensure appropriate and prudent investment practices.

II-57


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Detailed below is a description of the investment strategies for each major asset category disclosed above:
Domestic equity.This portion of the portfolio comprises a mix of large and small capitalization stocks with generally an equal distribution of value and growth attributes managed both actively and through passive index approaches.
International equity.This portion of the portfolio is actively managed with a blend of growth stocks and value stocks with both developed and emerging market exposure.
Fixed income.This portion of the portfolio is actively managed through an allocation to long-dated, investment grade corporate and government bonds.
Special situations.Though currently unfunded, this portion of the portfolio was established both to execute opportunistic investment strategies with the objectives of diversifying and enhancing returns and exploiting short-term inefficiencies, as well as to invest in promising new strategies of a longer-term nature.
Real estate investments.Assets in this portion of the portfolio are invested in traditional private market, equity-oriented investments in real properties (indirectly through pooled funds or partnerships) and in publicly traded real estate securities.
Private equity.This portion of the portfolio generally consists of investments in private partnerships that invest in private or public securities typically through privately negotiated and/or structured transactions. Leveraged buyouts, venture capital, and distressed debt are examples of investment strategies within this category.
The fair values of pension plan assets as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 are presented below. These fair value measurements exclude cash, receivables related to investment income, pending investments sales, and payables related to pending investment purchases.
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using  
  Quoted Prices      
  in Active
Markets for
 Significant
Other
 Significant  
  Identical Observable Unobservable  
  Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2009: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
  (in millions)
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $1,117  $462  $  $1,579 
International equity*  1,444   144      1,588 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     416      416 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     113      113 
Corporate bonds     279      279 
Pooled funds     10      10 
Cash equivalents and other  3   341      344 
Special situations            
Real estate investments  174      547   721 
Private equity        555   555 
 
Total $2,738  $1,765  $1,102  $5,605 
 
Liabilities:                
Derivatives  (5)  (1)     (6)
 
Total $2,733  $1,764  $1,102  $5,599 
 
*Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well-diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.

II-58


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
                         
  Fair Value Measurements Using    
  Quoted Prices          
  in Active
Markets for
  Significant
Other
  Significant    
  Identical  Observable  Unobservable    
  Assets  Inputs  Inputs    
As of December 31, 2008: (Level 1)  (Level 2)  (Level 3)  Total 
  (in millions)
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $1,049  $427  $  $1,476 
International equity*  944   87      1,031 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     441      441 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     209      209 
Corporate bonds     286      286 
Pooled funds     3      3 
Cash equivalents and other  22   202      224 
Special situations            
Real estate investments  144      839   983 
Private equity        490   490 
 
Total $2,159  $1,655  $1,329  $5,143 
 
Liabilities:                
Derivatives  (8)        (8)
 
Total $2,151  $1,655  $1,329  $5,135 
 
*Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well-diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.
Changes in the fair value measurement of the Level 3 items in the pension plan assets valued using significant unobservable inputs for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:
                 
  2009 2008
  Real Estate     Real Estate  
  Investments Private Equity Investments Private Equity
      (in millions)    
Beginning balance $839  $490  $1,045  $520 
Actual return on investments:                
Related to investments held at year end  (240)  37   (170)  (141)
Related to investments sold during the year  (65)  10   4   25 
 
Total return on investments  (305)  47   (166)  (116)
Purchases, sales, and settlements  13   18   (40)  86 
Transfers into/out of Level 3            
 
Ending balance $547  $555  $839  $490 
 
The fair values presented above are prepared in accordance with applicable accounting standards regarding fair value. For purposes of determining the fair value of the pension plan assets and the appropriate level designation, management relies on information provided by the plan’s trustee. This information is reviewed and evaluated by management with changes made to the trustee information as appropriate.

II-59


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Securities for which the activity is observable on an active market or traded exchange are categorized as Level 1. Fixed income securities classified as Level 2 are valued using matrix pricing, a common model using observable inputs. Domestic and international equity securities classified as Level 2 consist of pooled funds where the value is not quoted on an exchange but where the value is determined using observable inputs from the market. Securities that are valued using unobservable inputs are classified as Level 3 and include investments in real estate and investments in limited partnerships. The Company invests (through the pension plan trustee) directly in the limited partnerships which then invest in various types of funds or various private entities within a fund. The fair value of the limited partnerships’ investments is based on audited annual capital accounts statements which are generally prepared on a fair value basis. The Company also relies on the fact that, in most instances, the underlying assets held by the limited partnerships are reported at fair value. External investment managers typically send valuations to both the custodian and to the Company within 90 days of quarter end. The custodian reports the most recent value available and adjusts the value for cash flows since the statement date for each respective fund.
Amounts recognized in the consolidated balance sheets related to the Company’s pension plans consist of the following:
         
  2008 2007
  (in millions)
Prepaid pension costs $  $2,369 
Other regulatory assets  1,579   188 
Current liabilities, other  (23)  (21)
Other regulatory liabilities     (1,288)
Employee benefit obligations  (763)  (379)
Accumulated other comprehensive income  54   (26)
 
         
  2009 2008
  (in millions)
Other regulatory assets, deferred $1,894  $1,579 
Other current liabilities  (25)  (23)
Employee benefit obligations  (1,106)  (763)
Accumulated other comprehensive income  74   54 
 
Presented below are the amounts included in accumulated other comprehensive income regulatory assets, and regulatory liabilitiesassets at December 31, 20082009 and 20072008 related to the defined benefit pension plans that had not yet been recognized in net periodic pension cost along with the estimated amortization of such amounts for 2009.2010.
                
 Prior Service Cost Net (Gain)Loss
 (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2009:
 
Accumulated other comprehensive income $10 $64 
Regulatory assets 188 1,706 
Total $198 $1,770 
 Prior Service Cost Net(Gain)Loss
 (in millions) 
Balance at December 31, 2008:
  
Accumulated other comprehensive income $12 $42  $12 $42 
Regulatory assets 220 1,359  220 1,359 
Regulatory liabilities   
Total $232 $1,401  $232 $1,401 
  
Balance at December 31, 2007:
 
Estimated amortization in net periodic pension cost in 2010:
 
Accumulated other comprehensive income $14 $(40) $1 $1 
Regulatory assets 66 122  31 9 
Regulatory liabilities 198  (1,486)
Total $278 $(1,404) $32 $10 
 
Estimated amortization in net periodic pension cost in 2009:
 
Accumulated other comprehensive income $2 $ 
Regulatory assets 33 7 
Regulatory liabilities   
Total $35 $7 

II-68II-60


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
The components of other comprehensive income, along with the changes in the balances of regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities, related to the defined benefit pension plans for the 15-month periodyear ended December 31, 20082009 and the 12-month period15 months ended September 30, 2007December 31, 2008 are presented in the following table:
                        
 Accumulated Other     Accumulated Other Regulatory Regulatory
 Comprehensive
Income
 Regulatory
Assets
 Regulatory
Liabilities
 Comprehensive Income Assets Liabilities
 (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2006
 $ $158 $(507)
Net gain  (28)   (753)
Change in prior service costs 4 46  
Reclassification adjustments: 
Amortization of prior service costs  (2)  (7)  (28)
Amortization of net gain   (9)  
Total reclassification adjustments  (2)  (16)  (28)
Total change  (26) 30  (781)
 (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2007
  (26) 188  (1,288) $(26) $188 $(1,288)
Net loss 83 1,412 1,322  83 1,412 1,322 
Change in prior service costs        
Reclassification adjustments:  
Amortization of prior service costs  (2)  (10)  (34)  (2)  (10)  (34)
Amortization of net gain  (1)  (11)    (1)  (11)  
Total reclassification adjustments  (3)  (21)  (34)  (3)  (21)  (34)
Total change 80 1,391 1,288  80 1,391 1,288 
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $54 $1,579 $  54 1,579  
Net loss 21 355  
Change in prior service costs  1  
Reclassification adjustments:   
Amortization of prior service costs  (1)  (34)  
Amortization of net gain   (7)  
Total reclassification adjustments  (1)  (41)  
Total change 20 315  
Balance at December 31, 2009
 $74 $1,894 $ 
Components of net periodic pension cost were as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
Service cost $146 $147 $153  $146 $146 $147 
Interest cost 348 324 300  387 348 324 
Expected return on plan assets  (525)  (481)  (456)  (541)  (525)  (481)
Recognized net loss 9 10 16  7 9 10 
Net amortization 37 35 26  35 37 35 
Net periodic pension cost $15 $35 $39  $34 $15 $35 
Net periodic pension cost is the sum of service cost, interest cost, and other costs netted against the expected return on plan assets. The expected return on plan assets is determined by multiplying the expected rate of return on plan assets and the market-related value of plan assets. In determining the market-related value of plan assets, the Company has elected to amortize changes in the market value of all plan assets over five years rather than recognize the changes immediately. As a result, the accounting value of plan assets that is used to calculate the expected return on plan assets differs from the current fair value of the plan assets.
Future benefit payments reflect expected future service and are estimated based on assumptions used to measure the projected benefit obligation for the pension plans. At December 31, 2008,2009, estimated benefit payments were as follows:
        
 Benefit Payments Benefit Payments
 (in millions) (in millions)
2009 $289 
2010 304  $323 
2011 322  341 
2012 341  360 
2013 362  383 
2014 to 2018 2,187 
2014 417 
2015 to 2019 2,456 

II-69II-61


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
Other Postretirement Benefits
Changes during the plan year ended December 31, 2009 and the 15-month period ended December 31, 2008 and the 12-month period ended September 30, 2007 in the accumulated postretirement benefit obligations (APBO) and in the fair value of plan assets were as follows:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 (in millions) (in millions)
Change in benefit obligation
  
Benefit obligation at beginning of year $1,797 $1,830  $1,733 $1,797 
Service cost 36 27  26 36 
Interest cost  138  107  113 138 
Benefits paid  (108)  (83)  (93)  (108)
Actuarial gain  (139)  (90)
Actuarial loss (gain) 34  (139)
Plan amendments  (59)  
Retiree drug subsidy 9 6  5 9 
Balance at end of year 1,733 1,797  1,759 1,733 
Change in plan assets
  
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year 820 731  631 820 
Actual return (loss) on plan assets  (232) 105  127  (232)
Employer contributions 142 61  72 142 
Benefits paid  (99)  (77)  (87)  (99)
Fair value of plan assets at end of year 631 820  743 631 
Funded status at end of year  (1,102)  (977)
Fourth quarter contributions  65 
Accrued liability $(1,102) $(912) $(1,016) $(1,102)
Other postretirement benefit plan assets are managed and invested in accordance with all applicable requirements, including ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code. The Company’s investment policy covers a diversified mix of assets, including equity and fixed income securities, real estate, and private equity. Derivative instruments are used primarily as hedging tools but may also be used to gain efficient exposure to the various asset classes.classes and as hedging tools. The Company primarily minimizes the risk of large losses primarily through diversification but also monitors and manages other aspects of risk. The actual composition of the Company’s other postretirement benefit plan assets as of the end of the year, along with the targeted mix of assets, is presented below:
            
 Target 2008 2007            
 Target 2009 2008
Domestic equity  44%  34%  45%  42%  37%  34%
International equity 17 18 20  19 24 18 
Fixed income 30 38 26  30 32 38 
Real estate 5 7 6 
Special situations 1   
Real estate investments 5 4 7 
Private equity 4 3 3  3 3 3 
Total  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%
Detailed below is a description of the investment strategies for each major asset category disclosed above:
Domestic equity.This portion of the portfolio comprises a mix of large and small capitalization stocks with generally an equal distribution of value and growth attributes managed both actively and through passive index approaches.
International equity.This portion of the portfolio is actively managed with a blend of growth stocks and value stocks with both developed and emerging market exposure.
Fixed income.This portion of the portfolio is actively managed through an allocation to long-dated, investment grade corporate and government bonds.
Special situations.Though currently unfunded, this portion of the portfolio was established both to execute opportunistic investment strategies with the objectives of diversifying and enhancing returns and exploiting short-term inefficiencies, as well as to invest in promising new strategies of a longer-term nature.
Trust-owned life insurance.Some of the Company’s taxable trusts invest in these investments in order to minimize the impact of taxes on the portfolio.
Real estate investments.Assets in this portion of the portfolio are invested in traditional private market, equity-oriented investments in real properties (indirectly through pooled funds or partnerships) and in publicly traded real estate securities.

II-62


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Private equity.This portion of the portfolio generally consists of investments in private partnerships that invest in private or public securities typically through privately negotiated and/or structured transactions. Leveraged buyouts, venture capital, and distressed debt are examples of investment strategies within this category.
The fair values of other postretirement benefit plan assets as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 are presented below. These fair value measurements exclude cash, receivables related to investment income, pending investments sales, and payables related to pending investment purchases.
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using  
  Quoted Prices      
  in Active Significant    
  Markets for Other Significant  
  Identical Observable Unobservable  
  Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2009: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
           (in millions)    
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $149  $42  $  $191 
International equity*  62   36      98 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     22      22 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     5      5 
Corporate bonds     12      12 
Pooled funds     18      18 
Cash equivalents and other     54      54 
Trust-owned life insurance     270      270 
Special situations            
Real estate investments  7      24   31 
Private equity        24   24 
 
Total $218  $459  $48  $725 
 
*Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well-diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using  
  Quoted Prices      
  in Active Significant    
  Markets for Other Significant  
  Identical Observable Unobservable  
  Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2008: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
           (in millions)    
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $114  $47  $  $161 
International equity*  41   24      65 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     23      23 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     9      9 
Corporate bonds     12      12 
Pooled funds     9      9 
Cash equivalents and other  1   73      74 
Trust-owned life insurance     215      215 
Special situations            
Real estate investments  6      36   42 
Private equity        21   21 
 
Total $162  $412  $57  $631 
 
*Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well-diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.

II-63


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Changes in the fair value measurement of the Level 3 items in the other postretirement benefit plan assets valued using significant unobservable inputs for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:
                 
  2009 2008
  Real Estate     Real Estate  
  Investments Private Equity Investments Private Equity
  (in millions)
Beginning balance $36  $21  $44  $22 
Actual return on investments:                
Related to investments held at year end  (10)  2   (6)  (6)
Related to investments sold during the year  (3)        1 
 
Total return on investments  (13)  2   (6)  (5)
Purchases, sales, and settlements  1   1   (2)  4 
Transfers into/out of Level 3            
 
Ending balance $24  $24  $36  $21 
 
The fair values presented above are prepared in accordance with applicable accounting standards regarding fair value. For purposes of determining the fair value of the pension plan assets and the appropriate level designation, management relies on information provided by the plan’s trustee. This information is reviewed and evaluated by management with changes made to the trustee information as appropriate.
Securities for which the activity is observable on an active market or traded exchange are categorized as Level 1. Fixed income securities classified as Level 2 are valued using matrix pricing, a common model using observable inputs. Domestic and international equity securities classified as Level 2 consist of pooled funds where the value is not quoted on an exchange but where the value is determined using observable inputs from the market. Securities that are valued using unobservable inputs are classified as Level 3 and include investments in real estate and investments in limited partnerships. The Company invests (through the pension plan trustee) directly in the limited partnerships which then invest in various types of funds or various private entities within a fund. The fair value of the limited partnerships’ investments is based on audited annual capital accounts statements which are generally prepared on a fair value basis. The Company also relies on the fact that, in most instances, the underlying assets held by the limited partnerships are reported at fair value. External investment managers typically send valuations to both the custodian and to the Company within 90 days of quarter end. The custodian reports the most recent value available and adjusts the value for cash flows since the statement date for each respective fund.
Amounts recognized in the balance sheets related to the Company’s other postretirement benefit plans consist of the following:
                
 2008 2007  2009 2008
 (in millions)  (in millions)
Other regulatory assets $489 $360 
Current liabilities, other  (3)  (3)
Other regulatory assets, deferred $374 $489 
Other current liabilities   (3)
Employee benefit obligations  (1,099)  (909)  (1,016)  (1,099)
Accumulated other comprehensive income 8 8  5 8 

II-70II-64


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
Presented below are the amounts included in accumulated other comprehensive income and regulatory assets at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008 related to the other postretirement benefit plans that had not yet been recognized in net periodic postretirement benefit cost along with the estimated amortization of such amounts for 2009.2010.
                        
 Prior Service Net(Gain) Transition Prior Service Net (Gain) Transition
 Cost Loss Obligation Cost Loss Obligation
 (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2009:
 
Accumulated other comprehensive income $ $5 $ 
Regulatory assets 41 298 35 
Total $41 $303 $35 
 (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2008:
  
Accumulated other comprehensive income $3 $5 $  $3 $5 $ 
Regulatory assets 88 335 66  88 335 66 
Total $91 $340 $66  $91 $340 $66 
Balance at December 31, 2007:
 
Estimated amortization as net periodic postretirement benefit cost in 2010:
 
Accumulated other comprehensive income $4 $4 $  $ $ $ 
Regulatory assets 99 177 84  5 5 10 
Total $103 $181 $84  $5 $5 $10 
 
Estimated amortization as net periodic postretirement benefit cost in 2009:
 
Accumulated other comprehensive income $ $ $ 
Regulatory assets 9 5 15 
Total $9 $5 $15 
The components of other comprehensive income, along with the changes in the balance of regulatory assets, related to the other postretirement benefit plans for the 15-month periodplan year ended December 31, 20082009 and the 12-month period15 months ended September 30, 2007December 31, 2008 are presented in the following table:
                
 Accumulated Other   Accumulated Other Regulatory
 Comprehensive
Income
 Regulatory
Assets
 Comprehensive Income Assets
 (in millions) (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2006
 $14 $539 
Net gain  (6)  (141)
Change in prior service costs   
Reclassification adjustments: 
Amortization of transition obligation   (15)
Amortization of prior service costs   (9)
Amortization of net gain   (14)
Total reclassification adjustments   (38)
Total change  (6)  (179)
Balance at December 31, 2007
 8 360  $8 $360 
Net loss 1  166  1 166 
Change in prior service costs   
Change in prior service costs/transition obligation   
Reclassification adjustments:  
Amortization of transition obligation   (18)   (18)
Amortization of prior service costs  (1)  (11)  (1)  (11)
Amortization of net gain   (8)   (8)
Total reclassification adjustments  (1)  (37)  (1)  (37)
Total change  129   129 
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $8 $489  8 489 
Net loss (gain)   (33)
Change in prior service costs/transition obligation  (3)  (56)
Reclassification adjustments: 
Amortization of transition obligation   (13)
Amortization of prior service costs   (8)
Amortization of net gain   (5)
Total reclassification adjustments   (26)
Total change  (3)  (115)
Balance at December 31, 2009
 $5 $374 

II-71II-65


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
Components of the other postretirement benefit plans’ net periodic cost were as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
Service cost $28 $27 $30  $26 $28 $27 
Interest cost 111 107 98  113 111 107 
Expected return on plan assets  (59)  (52)  (49)  (61)  (59)  (52)
Net amortization 31 38 43  25 31 38 
Net postretirement cost $111 $120 $122  $103 $111 $120 
The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Medicare Act) provides a 28% prescription drug subsidy for Medicare eligible retirees. The effect of the subsidy reduced Southern Company’s expenses for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007 by approximately $35$33 million, $35 million, and $39$35 million, respectively.
Future benefit payments, including prescription drug benefits, reflect expected future service and are estimated based on assumptions used to measure the accumulated benefit obligation for the postretirement plans. Estimated benefit payments are reduced by drug subsidy receipts expected as a result of the Medicare Act as follows:
                        
 Benefit Payments Subsidy Receipts Total Benefit Payments Subsidy Receipts Total
 (in millions) (in millions)
2009 $100 $(8) $92 
2010 110  (10) 100  $107 $(8) $99 
2011 120  (11) 109  117  (9) 108 
2012 127  (13)  114  123  (11) 112 
2013 134  (14)  120  129  (12) 117 
2014 to 2018 746  (100)  646 
2014 134  (14) 120 
2015 to 2019 722  (93) 629 
Actuarial Assumptions
The weighted average rates assumed in the actuarial calculations used to determine both the benefit obligations as of the measurement date and the net periodic costs for the pension and other postretirement benefit plans for the following year are presented below. Net periodic benefit costs were calculated in 20052006 for the 20062007 plan year using a discount rate of 5.50%6.00% and an annual salary increase of 3.50%.
             
  2008 2007 2006
 
Discount  6.75%  6.30%  6.00%
Annual salary increase  3.75   3.75   3.50 
Long-term return on plan assets  8.50   8.50   8.50 
 
             
  2009 2008 2007
Discount rate:            
Pension plans  5.93%  6.75%  6.30%
Other postretirement benefit plans  5.83   6.75   6.30 
Annual salary increase  4.18   3.75   3.75 
Long-term return on plan assets:            
Pension plans  8.50   8.50   8.50 
Other postretirement benefit plans  7.51   7.59   7.58 
 
The Company determinedestimates the long-termexpected rate of return on pension plan and other postretirement benefit plan assets using a financial model to project the expected return on each current investment portfolio. The analysis projects an expected rate of return on each of seven different asset classes in order to arrive at the expected return on the entire portfolio relying on each trust’s target asset allocation and reasonable capital market assumptions. The financial model is based on historicalfour key inputs: anticipated returns by asset class returns(based in part on historical returns), each trust’s asset allocation, an anticipated inflation rate, and current market conditions, taking into account the diversification benefitsprojected impact of investing in multiple asset classes.a periodic rebalancing of each trust’s portfolio.

II-66


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
An additional assumption used in measuring the APBO was a weighted average medical care cost trend rate of 9.15%8.50% for 2009,2010, decreasing gradually to 5.50%5.25% through the year 20152016 and remaining at that level thereafter. An annual increase or decrease in the assumed medical care cost trend rate of 1% would affect the APBO and the service and interest cost components at December 31, 20082009 as follows:
         
  1 Percent 1 Percent
  Increase Decrease
  (in millions)
Benefit obligation $122  $126 
Service and interest costs  9   7 
 

II-72


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
         
  1 Percent 1 Percent
  Increase Decrease
  (in millions)
Benefit obligation $115  $102 
Service and interest costs  9   9 
 
Employee Savings Plan
Southern Company also sponsors a 401(k) defined contribution plan covering substantially all employees. The Company provides an 85% matching contribution up to 6% of an employee’s base salary. Prior to November 2006, the Company matched employee contributions at a rate of 75% up to 6% of the employee’s base salary. Total matching contributions made to the plan for 2009, 2008, and 2007 and 2006 were $78 million, $76 million, $73 million, and $62$73 million, respectively.
3. CONTINGENCIES AND REGULATORY MATTERS
General Litigation Matters
Southern Company isand its subsidiaries are subject to certain claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. In addition, the business activities of Southern Company’s business activitiessubsidiaries are subject to extensive governmental regulation related to public health and the environment.environment such as regulation of air emissions and water discharges. Litigation over environmental issues and claims of various types, including property damage, personal injury, common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of environmental requirements such as opacity and air and water quality standards, has increased generally throughout the United States. In particular, personal injury and other claims for damages caused by alleged exposure to hazardous materials, and common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas and other emissions, have become more frequent. The ultimate outcome of such pending or potential litigation against Southern Company and its subsidiaries cannot be predicted at this time; however, for current proceedings not specifically reported herein, management does not anticipate that the liabilities, if any, arising from such current proceedings would have a material adverse effect on Southern Company’s financial statements.
Mirant Matters
Mirant Corporation (Mirant) was an energy company with businesses that included independent power projects and energy trading and risk management companies in the U.S. and selected other countries. It was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Southern Company until its initial public offering in October 2000. In April 2001, Southern Company completed a spin-off to its shareholders of its remaining ownership, and Mirant became an independent corporate entity.
Mirant Bankruptcy
In July 2003, Mirant and certain of its affiliates filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas. The Bankruptcy Court entered an order confirming Mirant’s plan of reorganization in December 2005, and Mirant announced that this plan became effective in January 2006. As part of the plan, Mirant transferred substantially all of its assets and its restructured debt to a new corporation that adopted the name Mirant Corporation (Reorganized Mirant).
Southern Company has certain contingent liabilities associated with guarantees of contractual commitments made by Mirant’s subsidiaries discussed in Note 7 under “Guarantees” and with various lawsuits related to Mirant discussed below. Also, Southern Company has joint and several liability with Mirant regarding the joint consolidated federal income tax returns through 2001, as discussed in Note 5. In December 2004, as a result of concluding an IRS audit for the tax years 2000 and 2001, Southern Company paid approximately $39 million in additional tax and interest related to Mirant tax items and filed a claim in Mirant’s bankruptcy case for that amount. Through December 2008, Southern Company received from the IRS approximately $38 million in refunds related to Mirant. Southern Company believes it has a right to recoup the $39 million tax payment owed by Mirant from such tax refunds. As a result, Southern Company intends to retain the tax refunds and reduce its claim against Mirant for the payment of Mirant taxes by the amount of such refunds. MC Asset Recovery, a special purpose subsidiary of Reorganized Mirant, has objected to and sought to equitably subordinate the Southern Company tax claim in its fraudulent

II-73


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
transfer litigation against Southern Company. Southern Company has reserved the remaining amount with respect to its Mirant tax claim.
Under the terms of the separation agreements entered into in connection with the spin-off, Mirant agreed to indemnify Southern Company for costs associated with these guarantees, lawsuits, and additional IRS assessments. However, ascertain costs. As a result of Mirant’s bankruptcy, Southern Company sought reimbursement as an unsecured creditor in Mirant’s Chapter 11 proceeding. As part of a complaint filed against Southern Company in June 2005 and amended thereafter, Mirant and The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Mirant Corporation (Unsecured Creditors’ Committee) objected to and sought equitable subordination of Southern Company’s claims, and Mirant moved to reject the separation agreements entered into in connection with the spin-off. MC Asset Recovery has been substituted as plaintiff in the complaint. If Southern Company’s claims for indemnification with respect to these or any additional future payments,costs are allowed, then Mirant’s indemnity obligations to Southern Company would constitute unsecured claims against Mirant entitled to stock in Reorganized Mirant. As a result of the $202 million settlement on March 31, 2009 of another suit related to Mirant (MC Asset Recovery litigation), the maximum amount Southern Company can assert by proof of claim in the Mirant bankruptcy is capped at $9.5 million. See Note 5 under “Effective Tax Rate” for more information regarding the MC Asset Recovery settlement. The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
MC Asset Recovery Litigation
In June 2005, Mirant, as a debtor in possession, and the Unsecured Creditors’ Committee filed a complaint against Southern Company in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas, which was amended in July 2005, February 2006, May 2006, and March 2007.
In December 2005, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order authorizing the transfer of this proceeding, along with certain other actions, to MC Asset Recovery. Under that order, Reorganized Mirant is obligated to fund up to $20 million in professional fees in connection with the lawsuits, as well as certain additional amounts. Any net recoveries from these lawsuits will be distributed to, and shared equally by, certain unsecured creditors and the original equity holders. In January 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas substituted MC Asset Recovery as plaintiff.
The complaint, as amended in March 2007, alleges that Southern Company caused Mirant to engage in certain fraudulent transfers and to pay illegal dividends to Southern Company prior to the spin-off. The alleged fraudulent transfers and illegal dividends include without limitation: (1) certain dividends from Mirant to Southern Company in the aggregate amount of $668 million, (2) the repayment of certain intercompany loans and accrued interest in an aggregate amount of $1.035 billion, and (3) the dividend distribution of one share of Series B Preferred Stock and its subsequent redemption in exchange for Mirant’s 80% interest in a holding company that owned SE Finance Capital Corporation and Southern Company Capital Funding, Inc., which transfer plaintiff asserts is valued at over $200 million. The complaint also seeks to recharacterize certain advances from Southern Company to Mirant for investments in energy facilities from debt to equity. The complaint further alleges that Southern Company is liable to Mirant’s creditors for the full amount of Mirant’s liability under an alter ego theory of recovery and that Southern Company breached its fiduciary duties to Mirant and its creditors, caused Mirant to breach its fiduciary duties to creditors, and aided and abetted breaches of fiduciary duties by Mirant’s directors and officers. The complaint also seeks recoveries under the theories of restitution and unjust enrichment. In addition, the complaint alleged a claim under the Federal Debt Collection Procedure Act (FDCPA) to avoid certain transfers from Mirant to Southern Company; however, on July 7, 2008, the court ruled that the FDCPA does not apply and that Georgia law should apply instead. The complaint seeks monetary damages in excess of $2 billion plus interest, punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs. Finally, the complaint includes an objection to Southern Company’s pending claims against Mirant in the Bankruptcy Court (which relate to reimbursement under the separation agreements of payments such as income taxes, interest, legal fees, and other guarantees described in Note 7) and seeks equitable subordination of Southern Company’s claims to the claims of all other creditors. Southern Company served an answer to the complaint in April 2007.

II-74II-67


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
In January 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas granted Southern Company’s motion to withdraw this action from the Bankruptcy Court and, in February 2006, granted Southern Company’s motion to transfer the case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. In May 2006, Southern Company filed a motion for summary judgment seeking entry of judgment against the plaintiff as to all counts of the complaint. In December 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia granted in part and denied in part the motion. As a result, certain breach of fiduciary duty claims alleged in earlier versions of the complaint are barred; all other claims in the complaint were allowed to proceed. On August 6, 2008, Southern Company filed a second motion for summary judgment. MC Asset Recovery filed its response to Southern Company’s motion for summary judgment on October 20, 2008. On February 5, 2009, the court denied the summary judgment motion in connection with the fraudulent conveyance and illegal dividend claims concerning certain advance return/loan repayments in 1999, dividends in 1999 and 2000, and transfers in connection with Mirant’s separation from Southern Company. The court granted Southern Company’s motion for summary judgment with respect to certain claims, including claims for restitution and unjust enrichment, claims that Southern Company aided and abetted Mirant’s directors’ breach of fiduciary duties to Mirant, and claims that Southern Company used Mirant as an alter ego. In addition, the court granted Southern Company’s motion in connection with the fraudulent transfer and illegal dividend claims concerning certain turbine termination payments. Southern Company believes there is no meritorious basis for the claims in the complaint and is vigorously defending itself in this action. However, the final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
Mirant Securities Litigation
In November 2002, Southern Company, certain former and current senior officers of Southern Company, and 12 underwriters of Mirant’s initial public offering were added as defendants in a class action lawsuit that several Mirant shareholders originally filed against Mirant and certain Mirant officers in May 2002. Several other similar lawsuits filed subsequently were consolidated into this litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The amended complaint is based on allegations related to alleged improper energy trading and marketing activities involving the California energy market, alleged false statements and omissions in Mirant’s prospectus for its initial public offering and in subsequent public statements by Mirant, and accounting-related issues previously disclosed by Mirant. The lawsuit purports to include persons who acquired Mirant securities between September 26, 2000 and September 5, 2002.
In July 2003, the court dismissed all claims based on Mirant’s alleged improper energy trading and marketing activities involving the California energy market. The other claims do not allege any improper trading and marketing activity, accounting errors, or material misstatements or omissions on the part of Southern Company but seek to impose liability on Southern Company based on allegations that Southern Company was a “control person” as to Mirant prior to the spin-off date. Southern Company filed an answer to the consolidated amended class action complaint in September 2003. Plaintiffs also filed a motion for class certification.
During Mirant’s Chapter 11 proceeding, the securities litigation was stayed, with the exception of limited discovery. Since Mirant’s plan of reorganization has become effective, the stay has been lifted. In March 2006, the plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration requesting that the court vacate that portion of its July 2003 order dismissing the plaintiffs’ claims based upon Mirant’s alleged improper energy trading and marketing activities involving the California energy market. Southern Company and the other defendants opposed the plaintiffs’ motion. In March 2007, the court granted plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration, reinstated the California energy market claims, and granted in part and denied in part defendants’ motion to compel certain class certification discovery. In March 2007, defendants filed renewed motions to dismiss the California energy claims on grounds originally set forth in their 2003 motions to dismiss, but which were not addressed by the court. In July 2007, certain defendants, including Southern Company, filed motions for reconsideration of the court’s denial of a motion seeking dismissal of certain federal securities laws claims based upon, among other things, certain alleged errors included in financial statements issued by Mirant. On August 6, 2008, the court entered an order in regard to the defendants’ motions to

II-75


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
dismiss and for partial summary judgment. The court granted the defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment in two respects concluding that certain holders of Mirant stock do not have standing under the securities laws. The court denied the defendants’ other motions and granted leave to the plaintiffs to re-plead their claims against the defendants. In accordance with the court’s order, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The plaintiffs added allegations based upon claims asserted against Southern Company in the MC Asset Recovery litigation. Southern Company and the remaining defendants filed motions to dismiss the amended complaint on October 9, 2008. On January 7, 2009, the trial judge dismissed all counts of the plaintiffs’ second amended complaint with prejudice. This matter is now concluded.
Environmental Matters
New Source Review Actions
In November 1999, the EPA brought a civil action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, including Alabama Power and Georgia Power, alleging that these subsidiaries had violated the New Source Review (NSR) provisions of the Clean Air Act and related state laws at certain coal-fired generating facilities. Through subsequent amendments and other legal procedures,After Alabama Power was dismissed from the original action, the EPA filed a separate action in January 2001 against Alabama Power in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama after Alabama Power was dismissed from the original action.Alabama. In these lawsuits, the EPA allegedalleges that NSR violations occurred at eight coal-fired generating facilities operated by Alabama Power and Georgia Power, including facilities co-owned by Mississippi Power and Gulf Power. The civil actions request penalties and injunctive relief, including an order requiring the installation of the best available control technology at the affected units. The EPA concurrently issued notices of violation to Gulf Power and Mississippi Power relating to Gulf Power’s Plant Crist and Mississippi Power’s Plant Watson. In early 2000, the EPA filed a motion to amend its complaint to add Gulf Power and Mississippi Power as defendants based on the allegations in the notices of violation. However, in March 2001, the court denied the motion based on lack of jurisdiction, and the EPA has not re-filed. The original action, now solely against Georgia Power, has been administratively closed since the spring of 2001, and the case has not been reopened.
In June 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama entered a consent decree between Alabama Power and the EPA, resolving a portion of the Alabama Power lawsuit relating to the alleged NSR violations at Plant Miller. The consent decree required Alabama Power to pay $100,000 to resolve the government’s claim for a civil penalty and to donate $4.9 million of sulfur dioxide emission allowances to a nonprofit charitable organization. It also formalized specific emissions reductions to be accomplished by Alabama Power, consistent with other Clean Air Act programs that require emissions reductions. In August 2006, the district court in Alabama granted Alabama Power’s motion for summary judgment and entered final judgment in favor of Alabama Power on the EPA’s claims related to all of the remaining plants: Plants Barry, Gaston, Gorgas, and Greene County.
The plaintiffs appealed the district court’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, where the appeal was stayed, pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in a similar case against Duke Energy. The Supreme Court issued its decision in the Duke Energy case in April 2007, and in December 2007, the Eleventh Circuit vacated the district court’s decision in the Alabama Power case and remanded the case back to the district court for consideration of the legal issues in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Duke Energy case. On July 24, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama granted partial summary judgment in favor of Alabama Power with respect to its other affected units regarding the proper legal test for determining whether projects are routine maintenance, repair, and replacement and therefore are excluded from NSR permitting. The decision did not resolve the case, and the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.which remains ongoing.
Southern Company believes that the traditional operating companies complied with applicable laws and the EPA regulations and interpretations in effect at the time the work in question took place. The Clean Air Act authorizes maximum civil penalties of $25,000 to $37,500 per day, per violation at each generating unit, depending on the date of the alleged violation. An adverse outcome in either of these cases could require substantial capital expenditures or affect the timing of currently budgeted capital expenditures that cannot be determined at this time and could possibly require payment of substantial penalties. Such expenditures could affect future results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.

II-76


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Carbon Dioxide Litigation
New York Case
In July 2004, three environmental groups and attorneys general from eight states, each outside of Southern Company’s service territory, and the corporation counsel for New York City filed complaints in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against Southern Company and four other electric power companies. The complaints allege that the companies’ emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, contribute to global warming, which the plaintiffs assert is a public nuisance. Under common law public and private nuisance theories, the plaintiffs seek a judicial order (1) holding each defendant jointly and severally liable for creating, contributing to, and/or maintaining global warming and (2) requiring each of the defendants to cap its emissions of carbon dioxide and then reduce those emissions by a specified percentage each year for at least a decade. The plaintiffs have not, however, requested that damages be awarded in connection with their claims. Southern Company believes these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. In September 2005, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted Southern Company’s and the other defendants’ motions to dismiss these cases. The plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in October 2005 but no decision has been issued. Theand, on September 21, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the district court’s ruling, vacating the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claim, and remanding the case to the district court. On November 5, 2009, the defendants, including Southern Company, sought rehearing en banc, and the court’s ruling is subject to potential appeal. Therefore, the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Kivalina Case
OnIn February 26, 2008, the Native Village of Kivalina and the City of Kivalina filed a suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against several electric utilities (including Southern Company), several oil companies, and a coal company. The plaintiffs are the governing bodies of an Inupiat village in Alaska. The plaintiffs contend that the village is being destroyed by erosion allegedly caused by global warming that the plaintiffs attribute to emissions of greenhouse gases by the defendants. The plaintiffs assert claims for public and private nuisance and contend that some of the defendants have acted in concert and are therefore jointly

II-68


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
and severally liable for the plaintiffs’ damages. The suit seeks damages for lost property values and for the cost of relocating the village, which is alleged to be $95 million to $400 million. On June 30, 2008, all defendants filed motions to dismiss this case. Southern Company believes that these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. On September 30, 2009, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss the case based on lack of jurisdiction and ruled the claims were barred by the political question doctrine and by the plaintiffs’ failure to establish the standard for determining that the defendants’ conduct caused the injury alleged. On November 5, 2009, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit challenging the district court’s order dismissing the case. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Other Litigation
Common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas emissions have become more frequent, and courts have recently determined that private parties and states have standing to bring such claims. For example, on October 16, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi’s dismissal of private party claims against certain oil, coal, chemical, and utility companies alleging damages as a result of Hurricane Katrina. In reversing the dismissal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that plaintiffs have standing to assert their nuisance, trespass, and negligence claims and none of these claims are barred by the political question doctrine. The Company is not currently a party to this litigation but the traditional operating companies and Southern Power were named as defendants in an amended complaint which was rendered moot in August 2007 by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi when such court dismissed the original matter. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Environmental Remediation
Southern CompanyCompany’s subsidiaries must comply with environmental laws and regulations that cover the handling and disposal of waste and releases of hazardous substances. Under these various laws and regulations, the subsidiaries may also incur substantial costs to clean up properties. The traditional operating companies have each received authority from their respective state PSCs to recover approved environmental compliance costs through regulatory mechanisms. Within limits approved by the state PSCs, these rates are adjusted annually or as necessary.
Georgia Power’s environmental remediation liability as of December 31, 20082009 was $10.1$12.5 million. Georgia Power has been designated or identified as a potentially responsible party (PRP) at sites governed by the Georgia Hazardous Site Response Act and/or by the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), including a large site in Brunswick, Georgia on the CERCLA National Priorities List (NPL). The parties have completed the removal of wastes from the Brunswick site as ordered by the EPA. Additional claims for recovery of natural resource damages at this site or for the assessment and potential cleanup of other sites on the Georgia Hazardous Sites Inventory and CERCLA NPL are anticipated.
By letter dated September 30, 2008, the EPA advised Georgia Power that it has been designated as a PRP at the Ward Transformer Superfund site located in Raleigh, North Carolina. Numerous other entities have also received notices from the EPA. Georgia Power, along with other named PRPs, will participate in negotiationsis negotiating with the EPA

II-77


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
to address cleanup of the site and reimbursement for the EPA’s past expenditures related to work performed at the site. In addition, on April 30, 2009, two PRPs filed separate actions in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina against numerous other PRPs, including Georgia Power, seeking contribution from the defendants for expenses incurred by the plaintiffs related to work performed at a portion of the site. The ultimate outcome of this matterthese matters will depend upon further environmental assessment and the ultimate number of PRPs and cannot be determined at this time; however, it is not expected to have a material impact on Southern Company’s financial statements.
Gulf Power’s environmental remediation liability includes estimated costs of environmental remediation projects of approximately $66.8$65.2 million as of December 31, 2008.2009. These estimated costs relate to site closure criteria by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) for potential impacts to soil and groundwater from herbicide applications at Gulf Power substations. The schedule for completion of the remediation projects will be subject to FDEP approval. The projects have been approved by the Florida PSC for recovery through Gulf Power’s environmental cost recovery clause; therefore, there was no impact on net income as a result of these estimates.
The final outcome of these matters cannot now be determined. However, based on the currently known conditions at these sites and the nature and extent of activities relating to these sites, management does not believe that additional liabilities, if any, at these sites would be material to the financial statements.statements.

II-69


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
FERC Matters
Market-Based Rate Authority
Each of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power has authorization from the FERC to sell power to non-affiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices. Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based contract with an affiliate.
In December 2004, the FERC initiated a proceeding to assess Southern Company’s generation dominancemarket power within its retail service territory. The ability to charge market-based rates in other markets iswas not an issue in the proceeding. Any new market-based rate sales by any subsidiary of Southern Company in Southern Company’s retail service territory entered into during a 15-month refund period that ended in May 2006 could behave been subject to refund to a cost-based rate level.
In November 2007, the presiding administrative law judge issued an initial decision regarding the methodology to be used in the generation dominance tests. The proceedings are ongoing. The ultimate outcome of this generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined, but an adverse decision byOn December 23, 2009, Southern Company and the FERC trial staff reached an agreement in a final order couldprinciple that would resolve the proceeding in its entirety. The agreement does not reflect any finding or suggestion that any subsidiary of Southern Company possesses or has exercised any market power. The agreement likewise does not require Southern Company to make any refunds related to sales during the 15-month refund period. The agreement does provide for the traditional operating companies and Southern Power to charge cost-based rates for certain wholesale salesdonate a total of $1.7 million to nonprofit organizations in the Southern Companystates in which they operate for the purpose of offsetting the electricity bills of low-income retail service territory, which may be lower than negotiated market-based rates, and could also result in total refunds of up to $19.7 million, plus interest. Southern Company and its subsidiaries believe that therecustomers. The agreement is no meritorious basis for an adverse decision in this proceeding and are vigorously defending themselves in this matter.
In June 2007, the FERC issued its final rule in Order No. 697 regarding market-based rate authority. The FERC generally retained its current market-based rate standards. Responding to a number of requests for rehearing, the FERC issued Order No. 697-A on April 21, 2008 and Order No. 697-B on December 12, 2008. These orders largely affirmed the FERC’s prior revision and codification of the regulations governing market-based rates for public utilities. In accordance with the orders, Southern Company submitted to the FERC an updated market power analysis on September 2, 2008 related to its continued market-based rate authority. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
On October 17, 2008, Southern Company filed with the FERC a revised market-based rate (MBR) tariff and a new cost-based rate (CBR) tariff. The revised MBR tariff provides for a “must offer” energy auction whereby Southern Company offers all of its available energy for sale in a day-ahead auction and an hour-ahead auction with reserve prices not to exceed the CBR tariff price, after considering Southern Company’s native load requirements, reliability

II-78


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
obligations, and sales commitments to third parties. All sales under the energy auction would be at market clearing prices established under the auction rules. The new CBR tariff provides for a cost-based price for wholesale sales of less than a year. On December 18, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the MBR tariff subject to certain revisions toreview and approval by the auction proposal. On January 21, 2009, Southern Company made a compliance filing that accepted all the conditions of the MBR tariff order. When this order becomes final, Southern Company will have 30 days to implement the wholesale auction. On December 31, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the CBR tariff subject to providing additional information concerning one aspect of the tariff. On January 30, 2009, Southern Company filed a response addressing the FERC inquiry to the CBR tariff order. Implementation of the energy auction in accordance with the MBR tariff order is expected to adequately mitigate going forward any presumption of market power that Southern Company may have in the Southern Company retail service territory. The timing of when the FERC may issue the final orders on the MBR and CBR tariffs and the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.FERC.
Intercompany Interchange Contract
The Company’s generation fleet in its retail service territory is operated under the Intercompany Interchange Contract (IIC), as approved by the FERC. In May 2005, the FERC initiated a new proceeding to examine (1) the provisions of the IIC among the traditional operating companies, Southern Power, and SCS, as agent, under the terms of which the power pool of Southern Company is operated, (2) whether any parties to the IIC have violated the FERC’s standards of conduct applicable to utility companies that are transmission providers, and (3) whether Southern Company’s code of conduct defining Southern Power as a “system company” rather than a “marketing affiliate” is just and reasonable. In connection with the formation of Southern Power, the FERC authorized Southern Power’s inclusion in the IIC in 2000. The FERC also previously approved Southern Company’s code of conduct.
In October 2006, the FERC issued an order accepting a settlement resolving the proceeding subject to Southern Company’s agreement to accept certain modifications to the settlement’s terms andterms. Southern Company notified the FERC that it accepted the modifications. The modifications largely involve functional separation and information restrictions related to marketing activities conducted on behalf of Southern Power. In November 2006, Southern Company filed with the FERC a compliance plan in connection with the order. In April 2007, the FERC approved, with certain modifications, the plan submitted by Southern Company. Implementation of the plan did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements. In November 2007, Southern Company notified the FERC that the plan had been implemented. OnIn December 12, 2008, the FERC division of audits issued for public comment its final audit report pertaining to compliance implementation and related matters. No comments were submitted challenging the audit report’s findings were submitted. Aof Southern Company’s compliance. The proceeding remains open pending a decision is now pending from the FERC.
Generation Interconnection Agreements
In November 2004, generator company subsidiaries of Tenaska, Inc. (Tenaska), as counterparties to three previously executed interconnection agreements with subsidiaries of Southern Company, filed complaints atFERC regarding the FERC requesting that the FERC modify the agreements and that those Southern Company subsidiaries refund a total of $19 million previously paid for interconnection facilities. No other similar complaints are pending with the FERC.
In January 2007, the FERC issued an order granting Tenaska’s requested relief. Although the FERC’s order required the modification of Tenaska’s interconnection agreements, under the provisions of the order, Southern Company determined that no refund was payable to Tenaska. Southern Company requested rehearing asserting that the FERC retroactively applied a new principle to existing interconnection agreements. Tenaska requested rehearing of FERC’s methodology for determining the amount of refunds. The requested rehearings were denied, and Southern Company and Tenaska have appealed the orders to the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia. The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.

II-79


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
audit report.
Right of Way Litigation
Southern Company and certain of its subsidiaries, including Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, and Southern Telecom, Inc. (a subsidiary of SouthernLINC Wireless), have been named as defendants in numerous lawsuits brought by landowners since 2001. The plaintiffs’ lawsuits claim that defendants may not use, or sublease to third parties, some or all of the fiber optic communications lines on the rights of way that cross the plaintiffs’ properties and that such actions exceed the easements or other property rights held by defendants. The plaintiffs assert claims for, among other things, trespass and unjust enrichment and seek compensatory and punitive damages and injunctive relief. Management of Southern Company andbelieves that its subsidiaries believe that they have complied with applicable laws and that the plaintiffs’ claims are without merit.
To date, Mississippi Power has entered into agreements with plaintiffs in approximately 95% of the actions pending against Mississippi Power to clarify its easement rights in the State of Mississippi. These agreements have been approved by the Circuit Courts of Harrison County and Jasper County, Mississippi (First Judicial Circuit), and dismissals of the related cases are in progress.have been dismissed. These agreements have not resulted in any material effects on Southern Company’s financial statements.

II-70


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
In addition, in late 2001, certain subsidiaries of Southern Company, including Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, and Southern Telecom, Inc. (a subsidiary of SouthernLINC Wireless), were named as defendants in a lawsuit brought in Troup County, Georgia, Superior Court by Interstate Fiber Network,Fibernet, Inc., a subsidiary of telecommunications company ITC DeltaCom, Inc. that uses certain of the defendants’ rights of way. This lawsuit alleges, among other things, that the defendants are contractually obligated to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the telecommunications company from any liability that may be assessed against it in pending and future right of way litigation. The Company believes that the plaintiff’s claims are without merit. In the fall of 2004, the trial court stayed the case until resolution of the underlying landowner litigation discussed above. In January 2005, the Georgia Court of Appeals dismissed the telecommunications company’s appeal of the trial court’s order for lack of jurisdiction. An adverse outcome in this matter, combined with an adverse outcome against the telecommunications company in one or more of the right of way lawsuits, could result in substantial judgments; however, thejudgments.
The final outcome of these matters cannot now be determined.
Income Tax MattersNuclear Fuel Disposal Costs
Leveraged LeasesAlabama Power and Georgia Power have contracts with the United States, acting through the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), which provide for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel. The DOE failed to begin disposing of spent nuclear fuel in 1998 as required by the contracts, and Alabama Power and Georgia Power are pursuing legal remedies against the government for breach of contract.
In 2002,July 2007, the IRS began the examinationU.S. Court of three sale-in-lease-out (SILO) transactions entered into by Southern Company. As a result of this examination, the IRS challenged the deductions related to these transactions. Southern disagreed with the IRS’s conclusion, went throughFederal Claims awarded Georgia Power approximately $30 million, based on its ownership interests, and awarded Alabama Power approximately $17 million, representing substantially all administrative appeals, paid approximately $168 million of the additional tax,direct costs of the expansion of spent nuclear fuel storage facilities at Plants Farley, Hatch, and suedVogtle from 1998 through 2004. In November 2007, the IRSgovernment’s motion for reconsideration was denied. In January 2008, the government filed an appeal and, in February 2008, filed a motion to stay the appeal. In April 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the refund of such taxes.
DuringFederal Circuit granted the second quarter 2008,government’s motion to stay the appeal pending the court’s decisions in favorthree other similar cases already on appeal. Those cases were decided in August 2008. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the IRS were reachedFederal Circuit has left the stay of appeals in several court casesplace pending the decision in an appeal of another case involving other taxpayers with similar leveraged lease investments. Pursuantspent nuclear fuel contracts.
In April 2008, a second claim against the government was filed for damages incurred after December 31, 2004 (the court-mandated cut-off in the original claim), due to the applicationgovernment’s alleged continuing breach of FIN 48 and FASB Staff Position No. FAS 13-2, “Accountingcontract. In October 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a Changesimilar request by the government to stay this proceeding. The complaint does not contain any specific dollar amount for recovery of damages. Damages will continue to accumulate until the issue is resolved or Projected Changethe storage is provided. No amounts have been recognized in the Timingfinancial statements as of Cash Flows Relating to Income Taxes Generated by a Leveraged Lease Transaction,” management is required to assess on a periodic basis, the likelyDecember 31, 2009 for either claim. The final outcome of the uncertain tax positions related to the SILO transactions. Basedthese matters cannot be determined at this time, but no material impact on these accounting standards and management’s review of the recent court decisions, Southern Company recorded an after-tax charge of approximately $67 million in the second quarter 2008.
On December 12, 2008, Southern Company receivednet income is expected as any damage amounts collected from the Commissionergovernment are expected to be returned to customers.
Sufficient pool storage capacity for spent fuel is available at Plant Vogtle to maintain full-core discharge capability for both units into 2014. Construction of the IRS an invitation to participate in a global settlement initiative related to the SILO transactions. Southern Company accepted the settlement offer on January 8, 2009. Pursuant to the settlement offer, Southern Company recorded an additional after-tax charge in the fourth quarter 2008 of $16 million. Including charges recorded in the second quarter 2008, total after-tax

II-80


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
charges related to settling the SILO litigation amounted to $83 million in 2008. Of the total, approximately $7 million represents interest and $76 million represents non-cash charges related to the reallocation of lease income and will be recognized in income over the remaining term of the affected leases. A final closing agreement with the IRSon-site dry storage facility at Plant Vogtle is expected to begin in sufficient time to maintain pool full-core discharge capability. At Plants Hatch and Farley, on-site dry storage facilities are operational and can be completed inexpanded to accommodate spent fuel through the first quarter 2009. At that time, Southern Company will make a cash payment to the IRSexpected life of approximately $113 million. This payment will represent $120 million related to the timing of tax benefits recognized in prior year tax returns, partially offset by $7 million in interest refunds. The settlement of the SILO issue represented a significant non-cash operating transaction due to the deposits previously paid to the IRS. This resulted in a reduction to other current assets of approximately $207 million, a reduction of approximately $168 million in accrued taxes, and a reduction of approximately $39 million in other current liabilities.each plant.
Georgia State Income Tax CreditsMatters
Georgia Power’s 2005 through 2008 income tax filings for the State of Georgia include state income tax credits for increased activity through Georgia ports. Georgia Power has also filed similar claims for the years 2002 through 2004. The Georgia Department of Revenue has not responded to these claims. In July 2007, Georgia Power filed a complaint in the Superior Court of Fulton County to recover the credits claimed for the years 2002 through 2004. An unrecognized tax benefit has been recorded related to these credits. See Note 5 under “Unrecognized Tax Benefits” for additional information. If Georgia Power prevails, these claims could have a significant, and possibly material, positive effect on Southern Company’s net income. If Georgia Power is not successful, payment of the related state tax could have a significant, and possibly material, negative effect on Southern Company’s cash flow. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.

II-71


Alabama Power NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Retail Regulatory Matters
Alabama Power
Retail Rate Plans
Alabama Power operates under a Rate Stabilization and Equalization Plan (Rate RSE) approved by the Alabama PSC. Prior to 2007, Rate RSE provided for periodic annual adjustments based upon Alabama Power’s earned return on end-of-period retail common equity. Effective January 2007 and thereafter, Rate RSE adjustments are based on forward-looking information for the applicable upcoming calendar year. Rate adjustments for any two-year period, when averaged together, cannot exceed 4% per year and any annual adjustment is limited to 5%. Prior to January 2007, annual adjustments were limited to 3.0%. Retail rates remain unchanged when the retail return on common equity (ROE) is projected to be between 13% and 14.5%. If Alabama Power’s actual retail ROE is above the allowed equity return range, customer refunds will be required; however, there is no provision for additional customer billings should the actual retail ROE fall below the allowed equity return range. The Rate RSE increase for 2008 was 3.24%, or $147 million annually and was effective in January 2008. OnIn October 7, 2008, the Alabama PSC approved a corrective rate package effective January 2009, that primarily providingprovides for adjustments associated with customer charges to certain existing rate structures. This package, effective in January 2009, is expected to generate additional annual revenues of approximately $168 million. Alabama Power expects these additional revenues will preclude the need for a rate adjustment under the Rate RSE in 2009 and agreed to a moratorium on any increase in rates in 2009 under Rate RSE. On December 1, 2008,2009, Alabama Power made its Rate RSE submission to the Alabama PSC of projected data for calendar year 2009.2010. The ratemaking procedures will remainRate RSE increase for 2010 is 3.2%, or $152 million annually, and became effective in effect untilJanuary 2010. The revenue adjustment under the Rate RSE is largely attributable to the costs associated with fossil capacity which is currently dedicated to certain long-term wholesale contracts that expire during 2010. Retail cost of service for 2010 reflects the costs for that portion of the year in which this capacity is no longer committed to wholesale. In an Alabama PSC order dated January 5, 2010, the Alabama PSC votes to modify or discontinue them.acknowledged that a full calendar year of costs for such capacity would be reflected in the Rate RSE calculation beginning in 2011 and thereafter. Under the terms of Rate RSE, the maximum increase for 2011 cannot exceed 4.76%.
The Alabama PSC has also approved a rate mechanism that provides for adjustments to recognize the cost of placing new generating facilities in retail service and for the recovery of retail costs associated with certificated purchased power purchase agreements (PPAs) under a Rate Certificated New Plant (Rate CNP). The annual true-up adjustment effective in April 2006 increased retail rates by 0.5%, or $19 million annually. In April 2007, thereThere was no adjustment to Rate CNP.

II-81


NOTES (continued)
CNP in April 2007, 2008, or 2009. Effective April 2010, Rate CNP will be reduced approximately $70 million annually, primarily due to the expiration on May 31, 2010 of the PPA with Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Power covering the capacity of Plant Harris Unit 1. Rate CNP also allows for the recovery of Alabama Power’s retail costs associated with environmental laws, regulations, or other such mandates. The rate mechanism is based on forward-looking information began operation in January 2005 and provides for the recovery of these costs pursuant to a factor that will beis calculated annually. Environmental costs to be recovered include operations and maintenance expenses, depreciation, and a return on invested capital. Retail rates increased due to environmental costs approximately 1.2%2.4% in January 2006,2008 and 0.6% in January 2007 and 2.4% in January 2008. Ondue to environmental costs. In October 7, 2008, Alabama Power agreed to defer collection during 2009 of any increase in rates during 2009 under thethis portion of Rate CNP which permits recovery of costs associated with environmental laws and regulations until 2010. The deferral of the retail rate adjustments will havehad an immaterial impact on annual cash flows, and had no significant effect on Southern Company’s revenues or net income but will have an immaterial impact on annual cash flows.in 2009. On December 1, 2008,2009, Alabama Power made its Rate CNP environmental submission to the Alabama PSC of projected data for calendar year 2009.2010. The Rate CNP environmental increase for 2010 is 4.3%, or $195 million annually, based upon projected billings. Under the terms of the rate mechanism, the adjustment became effective in January 2010. The Rate CNP environmental adjustment is primarily attributable to scrubbers being placed in service during 2010 at four of Alabama Power’s generating plants.
Fuel Cost Recovery
Alabama Power has established fuel costs are recoveredcost recovery rates under Rate ECR (Energy Cost Recovery), which provides for the addition of a fuel andan energy cost factor to base rates.recovery clause (Rate ECR) approved by the Alabama PSC. Rates are based on an estimate of future energy costs and the current over or under recovered balance. In June 2007, the Alabama PSC approved Alabama Power’s request to increase the retail energy cost recovery rate to 3.100 cents per kilowatt hour (KWH), effective with billings beginning July 2007 for the 30-month period ending December 2009. On2007. In October 7, 2008, the Alabama PSC approved an increase in Alabama Power’s Rate ECR factor to 3.983 cents per KWH effective with billings beginning October 2008. On June 2, 2009, the Alabama PSC approved a decrease in Alabama Power’s Rate ECR factor to 3.733 cents per KWH for billings beginning June 9, 2009. On December 1, 2009, the Alabama PSC approved a 24-month perioddecrease in Alabama Power’s Rate ECR factor to 2.731 cents per KWH for billings beginning with October 9, 2008 billings. Thereafter,January 2010 through December 2011. The Alabama PSC further approved an additional reduction in the Rate ECR factor of 0.328 cents per KWH for the billing months of January 2010 through December 2010 resulting in a Rate ECR factor of 2.403 cents per KWH for such 12-month period. For billing months beginning January 2012, the Rate ECR factor shall be 5.910 cents per KWH, absent a contrary order by the Alabama PSC. DuringRate ECR revenues, as recorded on the 24-month period, Alabama Power will be allowed to continue to include a carrying charge associated withfinancial statements, are adjusted for the under recovereddifference in actual recoverable fuel costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Accordingly, the approved decreases in the fuel expense calculation. In the event the application of this increased Rate ECR factor results in an over recovered position during this period, Alabama Power will pay interest on any such over recovered balance at the same rate used to derive the carrying cost. Accordingly, this approved increase in the billing factor will have no significant effect on Southern Company’s revenues or net income, but will increase annualdecrease operating cash flow.flows related to fuel cost recovery in 2010 when compared to 2009. As of December 31, 2008,2009, Alabama Power had an underover recovered fuel balance of approximately $306$200 million, of which approximately $181$22 million is included in deferred charges and other assetsregulatory liabilities, deferred in the balance sheets.
Georgia Alabama Power, Retail Regulatory Matters
In December 2007,along with the GeorgiaAlabama PSC, approved the 2007 Retail Rate Plan. Under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, Georgia Power’s earnings will continue to be evaluated against a retail ROE range of 10.25% to 12.25%. Two-thirds of any earnings above 12.25% will be applied to rate refunds withmonitor the remaining one-third applied to an environmental complianceover recovered fuel cost recovery (ECCR) tariff. There were no refunds related to earnings for the year 2008. Georgia Power has agreed that it will not file for a general base rate increase during this period unless its projected retail ROE falls below 10.25%. Retail base rates increased by approximately $99.7 million effective January 1, 2008 to provide for cost recovery of transmission, distribution, generation, and other investments, as well as increased operating costs. In addition, the ECCR tariff was implemented to allow for the recovery of costs for required environmental projects mandated by state and federal regulations. The ECCR tariff increased rates by approximately $222 million effective January 1, 2008. Georgia Power is required to file a general rate case by July 1, 2010, in response to which the Georgia PSC would be expectedbalance to determine whether the 2007 an additional adjustment to billing rates is required.

II-72


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Georgia Power
Retail Rate Plan should be continued, modified, or discontinued.Plans
In December 2004, the Georgia PSC approved the retail rate plan for the years 2005 through 2007 (20042004 Retail Rate Plan) for Georgia Power.Plan. Under the terms of the 2004 Retail Rate Plan, Georgia Power’s earnings were evaluated against a retail ROE range of 10.25% to 12.25%. Two-thirds of any earnings above 12.25% were applied to rate refunds, with the remaining one-third retained by Georgia Power. Retail rates and customer fees increased by approximately $203 million effective January 1, 2005 to cover the higher costs of purchased power, operating and maintenance expenses, environmental compliance, and continued investment in new generation, transmission, and distribution facilities to support growth and ensure reliability. In 2007, Georgia Power refunded 2005 earnings above 12.25% retail ROE. There were no refunds related to earnings for 20062007.
In December 2007, the Georgia PSC approved the 2007 Retail Rate Plan. Under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, Georgia Power’s earnings are evaluated against a retail ROE range of 10.25% to 12.25%. Retail base rates increased by approximately $100 million effective January 1, 2008 to provide for cost recovery of transmission, distribution, generation, and other investments, as well as increased operating costs. In addition, the ECCR tariff was implemented to allow for the recovery of costs related to environmental projects mandated by state and federal regulations. The ECCR tariff increased rates by approximately $222 million effective January 1, 2008. In connection with the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, Georgia Power agreed that it would not file for a general base rate increase during this period unless its projected retail ROE falls below 10.25%. Georgia Power is required to file a general rate case by July 1, 2010, in response to which the Georgia PSC would be expected to determine whether the 2007 Retail Rate Plan should be continued, modified, or 2007.discontinued.

II-82

Cost of Removal


NOTES (continued)
Southern CompanyThe economic recession has significantly reduced Georgia Power’s revenues upon which retail rates were set under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan. In June 2009, despite stringent efforts to reduce expenses, Georgia Power’s projected retail ROE for both 2009 and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
2010 was below 10.25%. However, in lieu of filing to increase customer rates as allowed under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, on June 29, 2009, Georgia Power filed a request with the Georgia PSC for an accounting order that would allow Georgia Power to amortize up to $324 million of its regulatory liability related to other cost of removal obligations.
On August 27, 2009, the Georgia PSC approved the accounting order. Under the terms of the accounting order, Georgia Power was entitled to amortize up to one-third of the regulatory liability ($108 million) in 2009, limited to the amount needed to earn no more than a 9.75% retail ROE. For the year ended December 31, 2009, Georgia Power amortized $41 million of the regulatory liability. In addition, Georgia Power may amortize up to two-thirds of the regulatory liability ($216 million) in 2010, limited to the amount needed to earn no more than a 10.15% retail ROE.
Fuel Cost Recovery
Georgia Power has established fuel cost recovery rates approved by the Georgia PSC. The Georgia PSC approved increases in Georgia Power’s total annual billings of approximately $383 million effective March 1, 2007 and approximately $222 million effective June 1, 2008. On December 15, 2009, Georgia Power filed for a fuel cost recovery increase with the Georgia PSC. On February 22, 2010, Georgia Power, the Georgia PSC Public Interest Advocacy Staff, and three customer groups entered into a stipulation to resolve the case, subject to approval by the Georgia PSC (the Stipulation). Under the terms of the Stipulation, Georgia Power’s annual fuel cost recovery billings will increase by approximately $425 million. In addition, Georgia Power will implement an interim fuel rider, which would allow Georgia Power to adjust its fuel cost recovery rates prior to the next fuel case if the under recovered fuel balance exceeds budget by more than $75 million. Georgia Power is required to file its next fuel case by March 1, 2011. The Georgia PSC order also requires Georgia Poweris scheduled to file for avote on the Stipulation on March 11, 2010 with the new fuel cost recovery rate no later than March 1, 2009. On February 19, 2009, the Georgia PSC approved Georgia Power’s request to delay the filing of that case until March 13, 2009. The new rates are expected to become effective on JuneApril 1, 2009. 2010. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
As of December 31, 2008,2009, Georgia Power had anPower’s under recovered fuel balance oftotaled approximately $764$665 million, which if the Stipulation is approved, Georgia Power will recover over 32 months beginning April 1, 2010. Therefore, approximately $373 million of which approximately $426 millionthe under recovered regulatory clause revenues for Georgia Power is included in deferred charges and other assets in the balance sheets.at December 31, 2009.
Gulf Power Retail Regulatory Matters
On July 29, 2008, the Florida PSC approved Gulf Power’s request to increase the fuel cost recovery factor effective with billings beginning September 2008. The remaining portion of the projected under recovered balance is expected to be recovered in 2009. On September 2, 2008, Gulf Power filed its 2009 projected fuel cost recovery filing with the Florida PSC which includes the fuel factors proposed for January 2009 through December 2009. On October 13, 2008, Gulf Power notified the Florida PSC that the updated projected fuel cost under recovery balance at year-end exceeds the 10% threshold, but no adjustment to the fuel factor was requested. On November 6, 2008, the Florida PSC approved an increase of approximately 12.9% in the fuel factor for retail customers effective with billings beginning January 2009. The fuel factors are intended to allow Gulf Power to recover its projected 2009 fuel and purchased power costs as well as the 2008 under recovered amounts in 2009. Fuel cost recovery revenues as recorded onin the financial statements are adjusted for differences in actual recoverable costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Accordingly, changinga change in the billing factor has no significant effect on Southern Company’s revenues or net income, but does impact annual cash flow. As of December 31, 2008, Gulf Power had an under recovered fuel balance of approximately $97 million, which is included in current assets in the balance sheets.
Storm Damage Cost Recovery
Each traditional operating company maintains a reserve to cover the cost of damages from major storms to its transmission and distribution lines and generally the cost of uninsured damages to its generation facilities and other property. In addition, each traditional operating company affected by recent hurricanes has been authorized by its state PSC to defer the portion of the hurricane restoration costs that exceeded the balance in its storm damage reserve account. As of December 31, 2008, the under recovered balance in Southern Company’s storm damage reserve accounts totaled approximately $27 million, of which approximately $21 million and $6 million, respectively, are included in the balance sheets herein under “Other Current Assets” and “Other Regulatory Assets.”
In August 2005, Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast of the United States and caused significant damage within Mississippi Power’s service area. The estimated total storm restoration costs relating to Hurricane Katrina through December 31, 2007 of $302.4 million, which was net of expected insurance proceeds of approximately $77 million, without offset for the property damage reserve of $3.0 million, was affirmed by the Mississippi PSC in June 2006, and Mississippi Power was ordered to establish a regulatory asset for the retail portion. The Mississippi PSC issued an order directing Mississippi Power to file an application with the Mississippi Development Authority (MDA) for a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). In October 2006, Mississippi Power received from the MDA a CDBG in the amount of $276.4 million, which was allocated to both the retail and wholesale jurisdictions. In the same month, the Mississippi PSC issued a financing order that authorized the issuance of system restoration bonds for the remaining $25.2 million of the retail portion of storm recovery costs not covered by the CDBG. These funds were received in June 2007. Mississippi Power affirmed the $302.4 million total storm costs incurred as of December 31, 2007. Mississippi Power plans to file with the Mississippi PSC its final accounting of the restoration cost relating to Hurricane Katrina and the storm operations center by the end of the first quarter 2009, at which time the final net retail receivable of approximately $3.2 million is expected to be recovered.

II-83II-73


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
In July 2006, the Florida PSC issued its order approving a stipulation and settlement between Gulf Power and several consumer groups that resolved all matters relating to Gulf Power’s request for recovery of incurred costs for storm-recovery activities and the replenishment of Gulf Power’s property damage reserve. The order provided for an extension of the storm-recovery surcharge then being collected by Gulf Power for an additional 27 months, expiring in June 2009. Funds collected by Gulf Power related to the storm recovery costs associated with previous hurricanes had been fully recovered by August 31, 2008. Funds collected by Gulf Power through its storm recovery surcharge are now being credited to the property damage reserve and will continue though June 2009 when the approved surcharge ends. The Florida PSC-approved annual accrual to the property damage reserve is $3.5 million, with a target level for the reserve between $25.1 million and $36.0 million. The Florida PSC also authorized Gulf Power to make additional accruals above the $3.5 million at Gulf Power’s discretion. Gulf Power accrued total expenses of $3.5 million in 2008, $3.5 million in 2007, and $6.5 million in 2006. According to the order, in the case of future storms, if Gulf Power incurs cumulative costs for storm-recovery activities in excess of $10 million during any calendar year, Gulf Power will be permitted to file a streamlined formal request for an interim surcharge. Any interim surcharge would provide for the recovery, subject to refund, of up to 80% of the claimed costs for storm-recovery activities. Gulf Power would then petition the Florida PSC for full recovery through an additional surcharge or other cost recovery mechanism. As of December 31, 2008, Gulf Power’s balance in the property damage reserve totaled approximately $9.8 million which is included in the balance sheets under deferred liabilities.
Integrated Coal Gasification Combined CycleNuclear Construction
On January 16,August 26, 2009, Mississippi Power filed for a Certificate of Public Conveniencethe NRC issued an Early Site Permit and Necessity with the Mississippi PSCLimited Work Authorization to allow construction of a new electric generating plant located in Kemper County, Mississippi. The plant would utilize an advanced integrated coal gasification combined cycle (IGCC) with an output capacity of 582 megawatts. The Kemper IGCC will use locally mined lignite (an abundant, lower heating value coal) from a proposed mine adjacent to the plant as fuel. This certificate, if approved by the Mississippi PSC, would authorize Mississippi Power to acquire, construct and operate the Kemper IGCC and related facilities. The Kemper IGCC, subject to federal and state environmental reviews and certain regulatory approvals, is expected to begin commercial operation in November 2013. As part of its filing, Mississippi Power has requested certain rate recovery treatment in accordance with the base load construction legislation.
Mississippi Power filed an application in June 2006 with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for certain tax credits available to projects using clean coal technologies under the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The DOE subsequently certified the Kemper IGCC, and in November 2006 the IRS allocated Internal Revenue Code Section 48A tax credits of $133 million to Mississippi Power. The utilization of these credits is dependent upon meeting the certification requirements for the Kemper IGCC, including an in-service date no later than November 2013. Mississippi Power has secured all environmental reviews and permits necessary to commence construction of the Kemper IGCC and has entered into a binding contract for the steam turbine generator, completing two milestone requirements for the Section 48A credits.
On February 14, 2008, Mississippi Power also requested that the DOE transfer the remaining funds previously granted to a cancelled Southern Company project that would have been located in Orlando, Florida. On December 12, 2008, an agreement was reached to assign the remaining funds to the Kemper IGCC. The estimated construction cost of the Kemper IGCC is approximately $2.2 billion, which is net of $220 million related to funding to be received from the DOE related to project construction. The remaining DOE funding of $50 million is projected to be used for demonstration over the first few years of operation.
Beginning in December 2006, the Mississippi PSC has approved Mississippi Power’s requested accounting treatment to defer the costs associated with Mississippi Power’s generation resource planning, evaluation, and screening activities as a regulatory asset. On December 22, 2008, Mississippi Power requested an amendment to its original order that would allow these costs to continue to be charged to and remain in a regulatory asset until January 1, 2010. In its application, Mississippi Power reported that it anticipated spending approximately $61

II-84


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
million by or before May 31, 2009. At December 31, 2008, Mississippi Power had spent $42.3 million of the $61 million, of which $3.7 million related to land purchases capitalized. Of the remaining amount, $0.8 million was expensed and $37.8 million was deferred in other regulatory assets.
The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
Nuclear
In August 2006, Southern Nuclear, on behalf of Georgia Power, Oglethorpe Power Corporation (OPC), the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia (MEAG Power), and the City of Dalton, Georgia, an incorporated municipality in the State of Georgia acting by and through its Board of Water, Light and Sinking Fund Commissioners (collectively, Owners), filed an application with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for an early site permit relatingrelated to two additional nuclear units on the site of Plant Vogtle.Vogtle (Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4). See Note 4 to the financial statements for additional information on these co-owners. OnIn March 31, 2008, Southern Nuclear filed an application with the NRC for a combined construction and operating license (COL) for the new units. If licensed by the NRC, Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 are scheduled to be placed in service in 2016 and 2017, respectively.
OnIn April 8, 2008, Georgia Power, acting for itself and as agent for the Owners, and a consortium consisting of Westinghouse Electric Company LLC (Westinghouse) and Stone & Webster, Inc. (collectively, Consortium) entered into an engineering, procurement, and construction agreement to design, engineer, procure, construct, and test two AP1000 nuclear units with electric generating capacity of approximately 1,100 megawattsMWs each and related facilities, structures, and improvements at Plant Vogtle (Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement).
The Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement is an arrangement whereby the Consortium supplies and constructs the entire facility with the exception of certain items provided by the Owners. Under the terms of the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement, the Owners willagreed to pay a purchase price that will be subject to certain price escalationescalations and adjustments, including certain index-based adjustments, as well as adjustments for change orders, and performance bonuses.bonuses for early completion and unit performance. Each Owner is severally (and not jointly) liable for its proportionate share, based on its ownership interest, of all amounts owed to the Consortium under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement. Georgia Power’s proportionate share based on its current ownership interest, is 45.7%. Under the terms of a separate joint development agreement,
On February 23, 2010, Georgia Power, acting for itself and as agent for the Owners, finalized their ownership percentages on July 2, 2008, except for allowed changes, under certain limited circumstances, duringand the Consortium entered into an amendment to the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement. The amendment, which is subject to the approval of the Georgia PSC, replaces certain of the index-based adjustments to the purchase price with fixed escalation amounts.
On March 17, 2009, the Georgia PSC voted to certify construction of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 at an in-service cost of $6.4 billion. In addition, the Georgia PSC voted to approve inclusion of the related construction work in progress accounts in rate base.
On April 21, 2009, the Governor of the State of Georgia signed into law the Georgia Nuclear Energy Financing Act that will allow Georgia Power to recover financing costs for nuclear construction projects by including the related construction work in progress accounts in rate base during the construction period. The cost recovery provisions will become effective on January 1, 2011. With respect to Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4, this legislation allows Georgia Power to recover projected financing costs of approximately $1.7 billion during the construction period beginning in 2011, which reduces the projected in-service cost to approximately $4.4 billion.
On June 15, 2009, an environmental group filed a petition in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia seeking review of the Georgia PSC’s certification process.order and challenging the constitutionality of the Georgia Nuclear Energy Financing Act. Georgia Power believes there is no meritorious basis for this petition and intends to vigorously defend against the requested actions.
On August 1, 2008,27, 2009, the NRC issued letters to Westinghouse revising the review schedules needed to certify the AP1000 standard design for new reactors and expressing concerns related to the availability of adequate information and the shield building design. The shield building protects the containment and provides structural support to the containment cooling water supply. Georgia Power submitted an applicationis continuing to work with Westinghouse and the NRC to resolve these concerns. Any possible delays in the AP1000 design certification schedule, including those addressed by the NRC in their letters, are not currently expected to affect the projected commercial operation dates for Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4.
There are pending technical and procedural challenges to the construction and licensing of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4. Similar additional challenges at the state and federal level are expected as construction proceeds.
On August 31, 2009, Georgia Power filed with the Georgia PSC its first semi-annual construction monitoring report for Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 for the period ended June 30, 2009 which did not include any proposed change to certify the project. Hearings began November 3, 2008 and a final certification decision is expected in March 2009.
Ifestimated construction cost as certified by the Georgia PSC in March 2009. On February 25, 2010, the Georgia PSC approved the expenditures made by Georgia Power pursuant to the certification through June 30, 2009. The Georgia PSC also ordered that in its future semi-annual construction monitoring reports, Georgia Power will report against a total certified cost of approximately $6.1 billion, which is the effective certified amount after giving effect to the Georgia Nuclear Energy Financing Act as described above. Georgia Power will continue to file construction monitoring reports by February 28 and licensed byAugust 31 of each year during the NRC, Vogtle Units 3 and 4 are scheduled to be placed in service in 2016 and 2017, respectively. The total plant value to be placed in service will also include financing costs for each of the Owners, the impacts of inflation on costs, and transmission and other costs that are the responsibility of the Owners. Georgia Power’s proportionate share of the estimated in-service costs, based on its current ownership interest, is approximately $6.4 billion, subject to adjustments and performance bonuses under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement.construction period.
The Owners and the Consortium have agreed to certain liquidated damages upon the Consortium’s failure to comply with the schedule and performance guarantees. The Owners and the Consortium also have agreed to certain bonuses payable to the Consortium for early completion and unit performance. The Consortium’s liability to the Owners for schedule and performance liquidated damages and warranty claims is subject to a cap.
The obligationsultimate outcome of Westinghouse Electric Company LLC and Stone & Webster, Inc. under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement are guaranteed by Toshiba Corporation and The Shaw Group, Inc., respectively. In the event of certain credit rating downgrades of any Owner, such Owner willthese matters cannot now be required to provide a letter of credit or other credit enhancement.determined.

II-85II-74


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)
On January 16, 2009, Mississippi Power filed for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity with the Mississippi PSC to allow construction of a new electric generating plant located in Kemper County, Mississippi. The Vogtle 3plant would utilize an advanced integrated coal gasification combined cycle technology with an output capacity of 582 MWs. The Kemper IGCC will use locally mined lignite from a proposed mine adjacent to the plant as fuel. This certificate, if approved by the Mississippi PSC, would authorize Mississippi Power to acquire, construct and 4 Agreement isoperate the Kemper IGCC and related facilities. The Kemper IGCC, subject to certification by the Georgia PSC. In addition, the Owners may terminate the Vogtle 3federal and 4 Agreement at any time for their convenience, provided that the Owners will be required to pay certain termination costs and, at certain stages of the work, cancellation fees to the Consortium. The Consortium may terminate the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement under certain circumstances, including delays in receipt of the COL or delivery of full notice to proceed, certain Owner suspension or delays of work, action by a governmental authority to permanently stop work, certain breaches of the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement by the Owners, Owner insolvency,state reviews and certain other events.
Southern Company also is participating in NuStart Energy Development, LLC (NuStart Energy), a broad-based nuclear industry consortium formed to share the cost of developing a COL and the related NRC review. NuStart Energy was organized to complete detailed engineering design work and to prepare COL applications for two advanced reactor designs. COLs for the two reactor designs were submitted to the NRC during the fourth quarter of 2007. The COLs ultimately are expected to be transferred to one or more of the consortium companies; however, at this time, none of them have committed to build a new nuclear plant.
Southern Company is also exploring other possibilities relating to additional nuclear power projects, both on its own or in partnership with other utilities. The final outcome of these matters cannot now be determined.
Nuclear Fuel Disposal Costs
Alabama Power and Georgia Power have contracts with the United States, acting through the DOE, which provide for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel. The DOE failed to begin disposing of spent nuclear fuel in 1998 as required by the contracts, and Alabama Power and Georgia Power are pursuing legal remedies against the government for breach of contract.
In July 2007, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims awarded Georgia Power approximately $30 million, based on its ownership interests, and awarded Alabama Power approximately $17 million, representing substantially all of the direct costs of the expansion of spent nuclear fuel storage facilities at Plants Farley, Hatch, and Vogtle from 1998 through 2004. In July 2007, the government filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied in November 2007. On January 2, 2008, the government filed an appeal, and on February 29, 2008, filed a motion to stay the appeal. On April 1, 2008, the court granted the government’s motion to stay the appeal pending the court’s decisions in three other similar cases already on appeal. Those cases were decided in August 2008. Based on the rulings in those cases, the appeal is expected to proceed in first quarter 2009.
On April 3, 2008, a second claim against the government was filed for damages incurred after December 31, 2004 (the court-mandated cut-off in the original claim), due to the government’s alleged continuing breach of contract. On October 31, 2008, the court denied a similar request by the government to stay this proceeding. The complaint does not contain any specific dollar amount for recovery of damages. Damages will continue to accumulate until the issue is resolved or the storage is provided. No amounts have been recognized in the financial statements as of December 31, 2008 for either claim. The final outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time, but no material impact on net income is expected as any damage amounts collected from the government are expected to be returned to customers.
Sufficient pool storage capacity for spent fuel is available at Plant Vogtle to maintain full-core discharge capability for both units into 2014. Expanded wet storage capacity and construction of an on-site dry storage facility at Plant Vogtleregulatory approvals, is expected to begin commercial operation in sufficient timeMay 2014. The Mississippi PSC has issued orders allowing Mississippi Power to maintain pool full-core discharge capability. At Plants Hatchdefer the costs associated with the generation resource planning, evaluation, and Farley, on-site dry storage facilities are operational and canscreening activities as a regulatory asset. As of December 31, 2009, Mississippi Power had spent a total of $73.5 million of such costs including regulatory filing costs.
On November 9, 2009, the Mississippi PSC issued an order that found Mississippi Power has a demonstrated need for additional capacity. Hearings to determine the appropriate resource to fill the need were held in February 2010 with a decision due by May 2010.
The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be expanded to accommodate spent fuel through the expected life of each plant.

II-86


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
determined.
4. JOINT OWNERSHIP AGREEMENTS
Alabama Power owns an undivided interest in units 1 and 2 of Plant Miller and related facilities jointly with Power South Energy Cooperative, Inc. Georgia Power owns undivided interests in Plants Vogtle, Hatch, Scherer, and Wansley in varying amounts jointly with OPC, MEAG Power, the City of Dalton, Georgia, Florida Power & Light Company, and Jacksonville Electric Authority. In addition, Georgia Power has joint ownership agreements with OPC for the Rocky Mountain facilities and with Florida Power Corporation for a combustion turbine unit at Intercession City, Florida. Southern Power owns an undivided interest in Plant Stanton Unit A and related facilities jointly with the Orlando Utilities Commission, Kissimmee Utility Authority, and Florida Municipal Power Agency.
At December 31, 2008,2009, Alabama Power’s, Georgia Power’s, and Southern Power’s ownership and investment (exclusive of nuclear fuel) in jointly owned facilities with the above entities were as follows:
                     
 Percent Amount of Accumulated Percent Amount of Accumulated
 Ownership Investment Depreciation Ownership Investment Depreciation
(in millions) (in millions)
Plant Vogtle (nuclear)  45.7% $3,303 $1,918 
Plant Vogtle (nuclear) Units 1 and 2  45.7% $3,285 $1,916 
Plant Hatch (nuclear) 50.1 953 521  50.1 937 522 
Plant Miller (coal) Units 1 and 2 91.8 986 425  91.8 1,063 449 
Plant Scherer (coal) Units 1 and 2 8.4 117 68  8.4 133 70 
Plant Wansley (coal) 53.5 552 189  53.5 696 195 
Rocky Mountain (pumped storage) 25.4 175 102  25.4 175 106 
Intercession City (combustion turbine) 33.3 12 3  33.3 12 3 
Plant Stanton (combined cycle) Unit A 65.0 151 14  65.0 151 20 
At December 31, 2008,2009, the portion of total construction work in progress related to Plants Miller, Scherer, Wansley, and WansleyVogtle Units 3 and 4 was $174$244 million, $247 million, $5 million, and $114$611 million, respectively,respectively. Construction at Plants Miller, Wansley, and Scherer relates primarily forto environmental projects. See Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters – Georgia Power – Nuclear Construction” for information on Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4.
Alabama Power, Georgia Power, and Southern Power have contracted to operate and maintain the jointly owned facilities, except for Rocky Mountain and Intercession City, as agents for their respective co-owners. The companies’ proportionate share of their plant operating expenses is included in the corresponding operating expenses in the statements of income and each company is responsible for providing its own financing.

II-75


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
5. INCOME TAXES
Southern Company files a consolidated federal income tax return and combined state income tax returns for the States of Alabama, Georgia, and Mississippi. Under a joint consolidated income tax allocation agreement, each subsidiary’s current and deferred tax expense is computed on a stand-alone basis. In accordance with IRS regulations, each company is jointly and severally liable for the tax liability.

II-87


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Current and Deferred Income Taxes
Details of income tax provisions are as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
Federal —  
Current $628 $715 $465  $771 $628 $715 
Deferred 177 11 207  40 177 11 
 805 726 672  811 805 726 
State —  
Current 72 114 110  100 72 114 
Deferred 38  (5)  (2)  (15) 38  (5)
 110  109 108  85 110 109 
Total $915 $835 $780  $896 $915 $835 
Net cash payments for income taxes in 2009, 2008, and 2007 and 2006 were $975 million, $537 million, $732 million, and $649$732 million, respectively.
The tax effects of temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and their respective tax bases, which give rise to deferred tax assets and liabilities, are as follows:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 (in millions) (in millions)
Deferred tax liabilities —  
Accelerated depreciation $5,356 $4,878  $5,938 $5,356 
Property basis differences  968 950  986 968 
Leveraged lease basis differences  306 479  251 306 
Employee benefit obligations  364 856  384 364 
Under recovered fuel clause  516 443  271 516 
Premium on reacquired debt  107 114  100 107 
Regulatory assets associated with employee benefit obligations  869 303  939 869 
Regulatory assets associated with asset retirement obligations  480 483  486 480 
Other  132 140  216 132 
Total 9,098 8,646  9,571 9,098 
Deferred tax assets —  
Federal effect of state deferred taxes  354 305  302 354 
State effect of federal deferred taxes  105 97  108 105 
Employee benefit obligations 1,325 656  1,435 1,325 
Over recovered fuel clause 119  
Other property basis differences  144 147  132 144 
Deferred costs 99 131  65 99 
Cost of removal 109  
Unbilled revenue  100 90  96 100 
Other comprehensive losses 82 48  81 82 
Regulatory liabilities associated with employee benefit obligations  514 
Asset retirement obligations  480 483  486 480 
Other  279 259  458 279 
Total 2,968 2,730  3,391 2,968 
Total deferred tax liabilities, net 6,130 5,916  6,180 6,130 
Portion included in prepaid expenses (accrued income taxes), net  (90)  (106) 229  (90)
Deferred state tax assets 103 88  105 103 
Valuation allowance  (63)  (59)  (59)  (63)
Accumulated deferred income taxes $6,080 $5,839  $6,455 $6,080 

II-88II-76


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
At December 31, 2008,2009, Southern Company had a State of Georgia net operating loss (NOL) carryforward totaling $1.0 billion, which could result in net state income tax benefits of $57$55 million, if utilized. However, Southern Company has established a valuation allowance for the potential $57$55 million tax benefit due to the remote likelihood that the tax benefit will be realized. These NOLs will expire between 20092010 and 2021. During 2008,2009, Southern Company utilized $5.8$4 million in available NOLs, which resulted in a $0.3$0.2 million state income tax benefit. The State of Georgia allows the filing of a combined return, which should substantially reduce any additional NOL carryforwards.
At December 31, 2008,2009, the tax-related regulatory assets and liabilities were $972 million$1.05 billion and $260$249 million, respectively. These assets are attributable to tax benefits flowed through to customers in prior years and to taxes applicable to capitalized interest. These liabilities are attributable to deferred taxes previously recognized at rates higher than the current enacted tax law and to unamortized investment tax credits.
In accordance with regulatory requirements, deferred investment tax credits are amortized over the lives of the related property with such amortization normally applied as a credit to reduce depreciation in the statements of income. Credits amortized in this manner amounted to $23 million in 2008, $23 million in 2007, and $23 million in 2006. At December 31, 2008, all investment tax credits available to reduce federal income taxes payable had been utilized.
Effective Tax Rate
The provision for income taxes differs from the amount of income taxes determined by applying the applicable U.S. federal statutory rate to earnings before income taxes and preferred and preference dividends of subsidiaries, as a result of the following:
            
 2008 2007 2006            
 2009 2008 2007
Federal statutory rate  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%
State income tax, net of federal deduction 2.6 2.7 2.9  2.1 2.6 2.7 
Synthetic fuel tax credits   (1.4)  (2.7)    (1.4)
Employee stock plans dividend deduction  (1.3)  (1.3)  (1.4)  (1.4)  (1.3)  (1.3)
Non-deductible book depreciation 0.8 0.9 1.0  0.9 0.8 0.9 
Difference in prior years’ deferred and current tax rate  (0.2)  (0.2)  (0.3)  (0.1)  (0.2)  (0.2)
AFUDC-Equity  (1.9)  (1.4)  (0.7)  (2.7)  (1.9)  (1.4)
Production activities deduction  (0.4)  (0.8)  (0.2)  (0.7)  (0.4)  (0.8)
Leveraged lease termination  (0.9)   
MC Asset Recovery 2.7   
Donations   (0.8)    (0.4)   (0.8)
Other  (1.0)  (0.8)  (0.9)  (0.1)  (1.0)  (0.8)
Effective income tax rate  33.6%  31.9%  32.7%  34.4%  33.6%  31.9%
Southern Company’s 2009 effective tax rate increased from 2008 primarily due to the $202 million charge recorded for the MC Asset Recovery litigation settlement, which completed and resolved all claims by MC Asset Recovery against Southern Company. Southern Company is currently evaluating potential recovery of the settlement payment through various means. The degree to which any recovery is realized will determine, in part, the final income tax treatment of the settlement payment. The ultimate outcome of any such recovery and/or income tax treatment cannot be determined at this time. The increase in Southern Company’s effective tax rate was partially offset by the gain on the early termination of an international leveraged lease investment and the increase in AFUDC related to increased due to the unavailability of the synthetic fuel tax credits in 2008. The credits were no longer allowed under Internal Revenue Code Section 45K for production after December 31, 2007.construction expenditures.
The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 created a tax deduction for a portion of income attributable to U. S. production activities as defined in the Internal Revenue Code Section 199 (production activities deduction). The deduction is equal to a stated percentage of qualified production activities net income. The percentage is phased in over the years 2005 through 2010 with a 3% rate applicable to the years 2005 and 2006, a 6% rate applicable for the years 2007 through 2009, and a 9% rate thereafter. This increase from 3% in 2006 to 6% in 2007 was one of several

II-89


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
factors that increased Southern Company’s 2007 deduction by $32 million over the 2006 deduction. The resulting additional tax benefit was $11 million. The IRS has not clearly defined a methodology for calculating this deduction. However, Southern Company has agreedreached an agreement with the IRS on a calculation methodology and signed a closing agreement onin December 11, 2008. Therefore, in 2008, Southern Company reversed the unrecognized tax benefit related to the calculation methodology and adjusted the deduction for all previous years to conform to the agreement which resulted in a decrease in the 2008 deduction when compared to the 2007 deduction. Certain aspects of the production activities deduction remain unresolved. The net impact of the reversal of the unrecognized tax benefits combined with the application of the new methodology had no material effect on the Company’s financial statements.
For 2009, Georgia Power donated 5,111 acres of land to the State of Georgia. In 2007, Georgia Power donated 2,200 acres of land in the Tallulah Gorge State Park to the State of Georgia. The estimated value of the donation caused a lowerdonations lowered the effective income tax rate for the yearyears ended December 31, 2007, when compared to2009 and December 31, 2008.2007.

II-77


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Unrecognized Tax Benefits
FIN 48 requires companies to determine whether it is “more likely than not” that a tax position will be sustained upon examination by the appropriate taxing authorities before any part of the benefit can be recorded in the financial statements. It also provides guidance on the recognition, measurement, and classification of income tax uncertainties, along with any related interest and penalties. For 2008,2009, the total amount of unrecognized tax benefits decreasedincreased by $118$53 million, resulting in a balance of $146$199 million as of December 31, 2008.2009.
Changes during the year in unrecognized tax benefits were as follows:
                    
 2008 2007 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
  
Unrecognized tax benefits at beginning of year $264 $211  $146 $264 $211 
Tax positions from current periods 49 46  53 49  46 
Tax positions from prior periods 130 7  2 130  7 
Reductions due to settlements  (297)     (297)   
Reductions due to expired statute of limitations  (2)    
Balance at end of year $146 $264  $199 $146 $264 
The tax positions from current periods increase for 20082009 relate primarily to the Georgia state tax credits litigation, the production activities deduction tax position, and other miscellaneous uncertain tax positions. The tax positions increase from prior periods increase for 2008 relate2009 relates primarily to the SILO transactions that was remeasured during the second quarter 2008 and effectively settled in December 2008. The reduction due to settlements relates to the agreement with the IRS on the SILO transactions and the agreement with the IRS regarding the production activities deduction methodology. The results of the effective settlement of the SILO transactions were related to timing differences and therefore had no impact on income.tax position. See Note 3 under “Income Tax Matters” for additional information.
Impact on Southern Company’s effective tax rate, if recognized, is as follows:
             
  2008 2007 Change
  (in millions)
   
Tax positions impacting the effective tax rate $143  $96  $47 
Tax positions not impacting the effective tax rate  3    168   (165)
 
Balance of unrecognized tax benefits $146  $264  $(118)
 

II-90


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
             
  2009 2008 2007
  (in millions)
 
Tax positions impacting the effective tax rate $199  $143  $96 
Tax positions not impacting the effective tax rate     3   168 
 
Balance of unrecognized tax benefits $199  $146  $264 
 
The tax positions impacting the effective tax rate increase of $47 million primarily relate to Georgia state tax credit litigation at Georgia Power. The $165 million decrease inPower and the production activities deduction tax positions not impacting the effective tax rate relates to the effective settlement of the SILO transactions.position. See Note 3 under “Income Tax Matters.”Matters” for additional information.
Accrued interest for unrecognized tax benefits:benefits was as follows:
                    
 2008 2007 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
  
Interest accrued at beginning of year $31 $27  $15 $31 $27 
Interest reclassified due to settlements  (49)     (49)   
Interest accrued during the year 33 4  6 33  4 
Balance at end of year $15 $31  $21 $15 $31 
Southern Company classifies interest on tax uncertainties as interest expense. The net amount of interest accrued during the period2009 was primarily associated with the SILO transactions and the Georgia state tax credit litigation. Interest reclassified due to settlements relates to the SILO transactions effective settlement agreement and the production activities deduction methodology. These amounts have been reclassified from interest on tax uncertainties to current interest payable.
Southern Company did not accrue any penalties on uncertain tax positions.
It is reasonably possible that the amount of the unrecognized benefit with respect to a majority of Southern Company’s unrecognized tax positions will significantly increase or decrease within the next 12 months. The possible settlement of the Georgia state tax credits litigation and/or the conclusion or settlement of federal or state audits could impact the balances significantly. At this time, an estimate of the range of reasonably possible outcomes cannot be determined.
The IRS has audited and closed all tax returns prior to 2004. The audits for the state returns have either been concluded, or the statute of limitations has expired, for years prior to 2002.2006.

II-78


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
6. FINANCING
Long-Term Debt Payable to Affiliated Trusts
Southern Company and certainCertain of the traditional operating companies have formed certain wholly-owned trust subsidiaries for the purpose of issuing preferred securities. The proceeds of the related equity investments and preferred security sales were loaned back to Southern Company or the applicable traditional operating company through the issuance of junior subordinated notes totaling $412 million, which constitute substantially all of the assets of these trusts and are reflected in the balance sheets as “Long-term Debt.” Southern Company and suchSuch traditional operating companies each consider that the mechanisms and obligations relating to the preferred securities issued for its benefit, taken together, constitute a full and unconditional guarantee by it of the respective trusts’ payment obligations with respect to these securities. At December 31, 2008,2009, preferred securities of $400 million were outstanding. See Note 1 under “Variable Interest Entities” for additional information on the accounting treatment for these trusts and the related securities.

II-91


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Securities Due Within One Year
A summary of scheduled maturities and redemptions of securities due within one year at December 31 was as follows:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 (in millions) (in millions)
  
Capitalized leases $20 $15  $21 $20 
Senior notes 565 1,005  1,090 565 
Other long-term debt 32 33  2 32 
Preferred stock  125 
Total $617 $1,178  $1,113 $617 
Debt and preferred stock redemptions, and/or serial maturitiesMaturities through 20132014 applicable to total long-term debt are as follows: $617 million in 2009; $1.1 billion in 2010; $825 million$1.1 billion in 2011; $1.8 billion in 2012; and $950$941 million in 2013.2013; and $430 million in 2014.
Bank Term Loans
Certain of the traditional operating companies have entered into bank term loan agreements in 2008.agreements. In 2008, Georgia Power borrowed $300 million under a three-year term loan agreement and $100 million under a short-term loan agreement. In 2008, Gulf Power borrowed $110 million under a three-year loan agreement and $50 million under a short-term loan agreement. Mississippi Power also borrowed $80 million under a three-year term loan agreement.agreement in 2008. The proceeds of these loans were used to repay maturing long-term and short-term indebtedness and for other general corporate purposes. Another Southern Company subsidiary had outstanding long-term bank loans of $184 million at December 31, 2008.
Senior Notes
Southern Company and its subsidiaries issued a total of $2.5$2.4 billion of senior notes in 2008.2009. Southern Company issued $600$650 million, and the traditional operating companies’ combined issuances totaled $1.9$1.8 billion. The proceeds of these issuances were used to repay maturing long-term and short-term indebtedness and for other general corporate purposes.
At December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, Southern Company and its subsidiaries had a total of $12.9$14.7 billion and $11.4$12.9 billion, respectively, of senior notes outstanding. At December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, Southern Company had a total of $1.1$1.8 billion and $900 million,$1.1 billion, respectively, of senior notes outstanding.
SubsequentPollution Control Revenue Bonds
Pollution control obligations represent loans to December 31, 2008, Georgia Powerthe traditional operating companies from public authorities of funds derived from sales by such authorities of revenue bonds issued $500 million long-term senior notes.to finance pollution control and solid waste disposal facilities. The proceeds were usedtraditional operating companies have $3.6 billion of outstanding pollution control revenue bonds and are required to repay long-termmake payments sufficient for the authorities to meet principal and short-term indebtednessinterest requirements of such bonds. Proceeds from certain issuances are restricted until qualifying expenditures are incurred.

II-79


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and for other general corporate purposes.Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Assets Subject to Lien
Each of Southern Company’s subsidiaries is organized as a legal entity, separate and apart from Southern Company and its other subsidiaries. Alabama Power and Gulf Power have granted one or more liens on certain of their respective property in connection with the issuance of certain pollution control revenue bonds with an outstanding principal amount of $194 million. There are no agreements or other arrangements among the subsidiary companies under which the assets of one company have been pledged or otherwise made available to satisfy obligations of Southern Company or any of its other subsidiaries.

II-92


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Bank Credit Arrangements
At December 31, 2008,2009, unused credit arrangements with banks totaled $4.2$4.8 billion, of which $970 million$1.5 billion expires during 2009,2010, $25 million expires in 2011, and $3.2 billion expires in 2012. The following table outlines the credit arrangements by company:
                     
          Expires
Company Total Unused 2009 2011 2012
  (in millions)
   
Alabama Power $1,256  $1,256  $466  $25  $765 
Georgia Power  1,345   1,333   225      1,120 
Gulf Power   120   120   120       
Mississippi Power  99   99   99       
Southern Company   950    950         950 
Southern Power  400    400         400 
Other  60   60   60       
 
Total $4,230  $4,218  $970  $25  $3,235 
 
Approximately $84 million of the credit facilities expiring in 2009 allow the execution of term loans for an additional two-year period and $544 million allow execution of one-year term loans. Most of these agreements include stated borrowing rates.
                             
          Executable  
          Term-Loans Expires
          One Two      
Company Total Unused Year Years 2010 2011 2012
          (in millions)        
 
Southern Company $950  $950  $  $  $  $  $950 
Alabama Power  1,271   1,271   372      481   25   765 
Georgia Power  1,715   1,703      40   595      1,120 
Gulf Power  220   220   70      220       
Mississippi Power  156   156   15   41   156       
Southern Power  400   400               400 
Other  60   60   60      60       
 
Total $4,772  $4,760  $517  $81  $1,512  $25  $3,235 
 
All of the credit arrangements require payment of commitment fees based on the unused portion of the commitments or the maintenance of compensating balances with the banks. Commitment fees average one-eighthapproximately1/2 of 1% or less for Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power. Compensating balances are not legally restricted from withdrawal.
Most of the credit arrangements with banks have covenants that limit debt levels to 65% of total capitalization, as defined in the agreements. For purposes of these definitions, debt excludes the long-term debt payable to affiliated trusts and, in certain arrangements, other hybrid securities. At December 31, 2008,2009, Southern Company, Southern Power, and the traditional operating companies were each in compliance with their respective debt limit covenants.
In addition, the credit arrangements typically contain cross default provisions that would be triggered if the borrower defaulted on other indebtedness above a specified threshold. The cross default provisions are restricted only to the indebtedness, including any guarantee obligations, of the company that has such credit arrangements. Southern Company and its subsidiaries are currently in compliance with all such covenants.
A portion of the $4.2$4.8 billion unused credit with banks is allocated to provide liquidity support to the traditional operating companies’ variable rate pollution control revenue bonds. The amount of variable rate pollution control revenue bonds requiring liquidity support as of December 31, 20082009 was approximately $1.3$1.6 billion. Subsequent to December 31, 2009, two remarketings of pollution control revenue bonds increased the total requiring liquidity support to $1.8 billion.
Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power make short-term borrowings primarily through commercial paper programs that have the liquidity support of committed bank credit arrangements. Southern Company and the traditional operating companies may also borrow through various other arrangements with banks. The amounts of commercial paper outstanding and included in notes payable in the balance sheets at December 31, 20082009 and December 31, 20072008 were $794.3$638 million and $1.2 billion,$794 million, respectively. The amounts of short-term bank loans included in notes payable in the balance sheets at December 31, 2008 andwere $150 million. There were no short term-bank loans included in notes payable in the balance sheet at December 31, 2007 were $150 million2009.
During 2009, the peak amount outstanding for short-term debt was $1.4 billion, and $113 million, respectively.the average amount outstanding was $956 million. The average annual interest rate on short-term debt was 0.4% for 2009 and 2.7% for 2008.

II-93II-80


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
During 2008, the peak amount outstanding for short-term debt was $1.7 billion, and the average amount outstanding was $1.1 billion. The average annual interest rate on short-term debt was 2.7% for 2008 and 5.3% for 2007.
Financial InstrumentsChanges in Redeemable Preferred Stock of Subsidiaries
The traditional operating companies and Southern Power enter into energy-related derivatives to hedge exposures to electricity, gas, and other fuel price changes. However, due to cost-based rate regulations, the traditional operating companies have limited exposure to market volatility in commodity fuel prices and prices of electricity. Southern Power also has limited exposure to market volatility in commodity fuel prices and prices of electricity because its long-term sales contracts shift substantially all fuel cost responsibility to the purchaser. However, Southern Power has been and may continue to be exposed to market volatility in energy-related commodity prices as a result of sales of uncontracted generating capacity. Each of the traditional operating companies manage fuel-hedging programs implemented perhas issued preferred and/or preference stock. The preferred stock of Alabama Power and Mississippi Power contains a feature that allows the guidelinesholders to elect a majority of their respective state PSCs. In addition to hedges on fuel and purchased power, the traditional operating companies and Southern Power may also enter into hedgessuch subsidiary’s board of forward electricity sales.
At December 31, the net fair value of energy-related derivative contracts by hedge designation was reflected in the financial statements as assets/(liabilities) as follows:
         
  2008 2007
  (in millions)
   
Regulatory hedges $(288) $ 
Cash flow hedges  ( 1)  1 
Non-accounting hedges  4   3 
 
Total fair value $(285) $4 
 
Energy-related derivative contracts which are designated as regulatory hedges relate primarily to the traditional operating companies’ fuel hedging programs, where gains and losses are initially recorded as regulatory liabilities and assets, respectively, and then are included in fuel expense as they are recovered through the fuel cost recovery clauses. Gains and losses on energy-related derivatives designated as cash flow hedges are mainly used by Southern Power to hedge anticipated purchases and sales and are initially deferred in other comprehensive income before being recognized in income in the same period as the hedged transactions. Gains and losses on energy-related derivative contracts thatdirectors if dividends are not designated or failpaid for four consecutive quarters. Because such a potential redemption-triggering event is not solely within the control of Alabama Power and Mississippi Power, this preferred stock is presented as “Redeemable Preferred Stock of Subsidiaries” in a manner consistent with temporary equity under applicable accounting standards. The preferred and preference stock at Georgia Power and the preference stock at Alabama Power and Gulf Power do not contain such a provision that would allow the holders to qualifyelect a majority of such subsidiary’s board. As a result, under applicable accounting standards, the preferred and preference stock at Georgia Power and the preference stock at Alabama Power and Gulf Power are required to be shown as hedges are recognized in the“noncontrolling interest,” separately presented as a component of “Stockholders’ Equity” on Southern Company’s consolidated balance sheets, consolidated statements of income as incurred. The pre-tax gains/(losses) reclassified from other comprehensive income to revenuecapitalization, and fuel expense were not material for any period presented and are not expected to be material for 2009. Additionally, no material ineffectiveness was recorded in earnings for any period presented. Southern Company has energy-related hedges in place up to and including 2012.
During 2006 and 2007, Southern Company had derivatives in place to reduce its exposure to a phase-outconsolidated statements of certain income tax credits related to synthetic fuel production in 2007. In accordance with Internal Revenue Code Section 45K, these tax credits were subject to limitation as the annual average price of oil increases. These derivatives settled on January 1, 2008 and thus there was no income statement impact for the period ended December 31, 2008. At December 31, 2007, the fair value of all derivative transactions related to synthetic fuel production was a $43 million net asset. For 2007 and 2006, the fair value gain/(loss) recognized in other income (expense) to mark the transactions to market was $27 million and $(32) million, respectively.
Southern Company and certain subsidiaries also enter into derivatives to hedge exposure to changes in interest rates. Derivatives related to fixed-rate securities are accounted for as fair value hedges. Derivatives related to existing variable rate securities or forecasted transactions are accounted for as cash flow hedges. The derivatives employed as hedging instruments are structured to minimize ineffectiveness. As such, no material ineffectiveness has been recorded in earnings for any period presented.

II-94


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
At December 31, 2008, Southern Company had $1.4 billion notional amount of interest rate derivatives outstanding with net fair value losses of $40 million as follows:
Cash Flow Hedges
                     
          Weighted   Fair Value
  Notional Variable Rate Average Hedge Maturity Gain (Loss)
  Amount Received Fixed Rate Paid Date December 31, 2008
  (in millions)       (in millions)
                     
Cash Flow Hedges on Existing Debt            
Alabama Power* $576  SIFMA Index  2.69% February 2010 $(11)
Georgia Power*  301  SIFMA Index  2.22% December 2009  (3)
Georgia Power   150  3-month LIBOR  2.63% February 2009  (-)
Georgia Power   300  1-month LIBOR  2.43% April 2010  (5)
                     
Cash Flow Hedges on Forecasted Debt            
Georgia Power   100  3-month LIBOR  4.98% February 2019  (21)
*Hedged using the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association Municipal Swap Index (SIFMA) (formerly the Bond Market Association/PSA Municipal Swap Index)
For fair value hedges, the changes in the fair value of the hedging derivatives are recorded in earnings and are offset by the changes in the fair value of the hedged item. The Company did not have any fair value hedges as of December 31, 2008.stockholders’ equity.
The fair value gains/(losses)following table presents changes during the year in redeemable preferred stock of subsidiaries for cash flow hedges are recorded in other comprehensive income and are reclassified into earnings at the same time the hedged items affect earnings. In 2008, 2007, and 2006, the Company incurred net gains/(losses) of $(26) million, $9 million, and $1 million, respectively, upon termination of certain interest derivatives at the same time it issued debt. The effective portion of these gains/(losses) has been deferred in other comprehensive income and will be amortized to interest expense over the life of the original interest derivative. The Company also settled an interest derivative early because of counterparty credit issues at a loss of $(2) million. This loss is deferred in other comprehensive income and will be amortized into earnings once the forecasted debt is issued in 2009. For 2008, 2007, and 2006, approximately $(19) million, $(15) million, and $(1) million, respectively, of pre-tax losses were reclassified from other comprehensive income to interest expense. For 2009, pre-tax losses of approximately $(34) million are expected to be reclassified from other comprehensive income to interest expense. The Company has interest-related hedges in place through 2019 and has deferred realized gains/(losses) that are being amortized through 2037.Southern Company:
Subsequent to December 31, 2008, Georgia Power settled $100 million of hedges related to the forecasted debt issuance in February 2009 at a loss of approximately $16 million. This loss will be amortized into earnings over 10 years.
All derivative financial instruments are recognized as either assets or liabilities and are measured at fair value. See Note 10 for additional information.

II-95


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
     
  Redeemable Preferred Stock
  of Subsidiaries
  (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2006
 $498 
Issued   
Redeemed   
 
Balance at December 31, 2007
 $498 
Issued   
Redeemed  (125)
Other  2 
 
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $375 
Issued   
Redeemed   
 
Balance at December 31, 2009
 $375 
 
7. COMMITMENTS
Construction Program
Southern Company is engaged in continuous construction programs, currently estimated to total $5.7 billion in 2009, $5.1$4.9 billion in 2010, and $5.8$5.3 billion in 2011.2011, and $6.2 billion in 2012. These amounts include $187$271 million, $151$157 million, and $150$166 million in 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2011,2012, respectively, for construction expenditures related to contractual purchase commitments for nuclear fuel included herein under “Fuel and Purchased Power Commitments.” The construction programs are subject to periodic review and revision, and actual construction costs may vary from these estimates because of numerous factors. These factors include: changes in business conditions; changes in load projections; changes in environmental statutes and regulations; changes in nuclear plants to meet new regulatory requirements; changes in FERC rules and regulations; PSC approvals; changes in legislation; the cost and efficiency of construction labor, equipment, and materials; project scope and design changes; and the cost of capital. In addition, there can be no assurance that costs related to capital expenditures will be fully recovered. At December 31, 2008,2009, significant purchase commitments were outstanding in connection with the ongoing construction program, which includes new facilities and capital improvements to transmission, distribution, and generation facilities, including those to meet environmental standards. See Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters – Georgia Power – Nuclear Construction” and “Retail Regulatory Matters – Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle” for additional information.
Long-Term Service Agreements
The traditional operating companies and Southern Power have entered into Long-Term Service Agreements (LTSAs) with General Electric (GE), Alstom Power, Inc., Mitsubishi Power Systems Americas, Inc., and Siemens AG for the purpose of securing maintenance support for the combined cycle and combustion turbine generating facilities owned or under construction by the subsidiaries. The LTSAs cover all planned inspections on the covered equipment, which generally includes the cost of all labor and materials. The LTSAs are also obligated to cover the costs of unplanned maintenance on the covered equipment subject to limits and scope specified in each contract.

II-81


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
In general, these LTSAs are in effect through two major inspection cycles per unit. Scheduled payments under the LTSAs, which are subject to price escalation, are made at various intervals based on actual operating hours or number of gas turbine starts of the respective units. Total remaining payments under these agreements for facilities owned are currently estimated at $2.3$2.4 billion over the remaining life of the agreements, which are currently estimated to range up to 2824 years. However, the LTSAs contain various cancellation provisions at the option of the purchasers.
Georgia Power has also entered into an LTSA with GE through 2014 for neutron monitoring system parts and electronics at Plant Hatch. Total remaining payments to GE under this agreement are currently estimated at $10$8 million. The contract contains cancellation provisions at the option of Georgia Power.
Payments made under the LTSAs prior to the performance of any work are recorded as a prepayment in the balance sheets. All work performed is capitalized or charged to expense (net of any joint owner billings), as appropriate based on the nature of the work.
Limestone Commitments
As part of Southern Company’s program to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions from its coal plants, the traditional operating companies have begun construction of flue gas desulfurization projects and have entered into various long-term commitments for the procurement of limestone to be used in suchflue gas desulfurization equipment. Limestone contracts are structured with tonnage minimums and maximums in order to account for fluctuations in coal burn and sulfur content. Southern Company has a minimum contractual obligation of 7.57.0 million tons, equating to approximately $299$295 million, through 2019. Estimated expenditures (based on minimum contracted obligated dollars) over the next five years are $13 million in 2009, $35$37 million in 2010, $35$36 million in 2011, $36$37 million in 2012, and $36$38 million in 2013.

II-96


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company2013, and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
$39 million in 2014.
Fuel and Purchased Power Commitments
To supply a portion of the fuel requirements of the generating plants, Southern Company has entered into various long-term commitments for the procurement of fossil, biomass fuel, and nuclear fuel. In most cases, these contracts contain provisions for price escalations, minimum purchase levels, and other financial commitments. Coal commitments include forward contract purchases for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissionemissions allowances. Natural gas purchase commitments contain fixed volumes with prices based on various indices at the time of delivery; amounts included in the chart below represent estimates based on New York Mercantile Exchange future prices at December 31, 2008.2009. Also, Southern Company has entered into various long-term commitments for the purchase of capacity and electricity. Total estimated minimum long-term obligations at December 31, 20082009 were as follows:
                                    
 Commitments Commitments
 Natural Gas Coal Nuclear Fuel Purchased Power Natural Gas Coal Nuclear Fuel Biomass Fuel Purchased Power*
 (in millions) (in millions)
  
2009 $1,507 $4,608 $187 $217 
2010 969 3,333  151 239  $1,349 $4,490 $271 $ $253 
2011 640 2,666  150 216  1,266 3,135 157  258 
2012 611 1,370  152 222  926 1,572 166 17 266 
2013 631 1,232  123 191  816 1,063 148 17 235 
2014 and thereafter 3,798 3,421 43 1,938 
2014 688 850 83 18 267 
2015 and thereafter 4,153 2,508 297 128 2,742 
Total $8,156 $16,630 $806 $3,023  $9,198 $13,618 $1,122 $180 $4,021 
*Certain PPAs reflected in the table are accounted for as operating leases.
Additional commitments for fuel will be required to supply Southern Company’s future needs. Total charges for nuclear fuel included in fuel expense amounted to $160 million in 2009, $147 million in 2008, and $144 million in 2007, and $137 million in 2006.2007.
Operating Leases
In 2001, Mississippi Power began the initial 10-year term of a lease agreement for a combined cycle generating facility built at Plant Daniel for approximately $370 million. In 2003, the generating facility was acquired by Juniper Capital L.P. (Juniper), whose partners are unaffiliated with Mississippi Power. Simultaneously, Juniper entered into a restructured lease agreement with Mississippi Power. Juniper has also entered into leases with other parties unrelated to Mississippi Power. The assets leased by Mississippi Power comprise less than 50% of Juniper’s assets. Mississippi Power is not required to consolidate the leased assets and related liabilities, and the lease with Juniper is considered an operating lease. The initial lease term ends in 2011, and the lease includes a purchase and

II-82


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
renewal option based on the cost of the facility at the inception of the lease. Mississippi Power is required to amortize approximately 4% of the initial acquisition cost over the initial lease term. EighteenIn April 2010, 18 months prior to the end of the initial lease term, Mississippi Power must notify Juniper if the lease will be terminated. Mississippi Power may elect to renew the lease for 10 years. If the lease is renewed, the agreement calls for Mississippi Power to amortize an additional 17% of the initial completion cost over the renewal period. Upon termination of the lease, at Mississippi Power’s option, it may either exercise its purchase option or the facility can be sold to a third party. If Mississippi Power does not exercise either its purchase option or its renewal option, Mississippi Power could lose its rights to some or all of the 1,064 MWs of capacity at that time.
The lease provides for a residual value guarantee, approximately 73% of the acquisition cost, by Mississippi Power that is due upon termination of the lease in the event that Mississippi Power does not renew the lease or purchase the assets and that the fair market value is less than the unamortized cost of the asset. A liability of approximately $3 million, $5 million, $7 million, and $9$7 million for the fair market value of this residual value guarantee is included in the balance sheets as of December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006,2007, respectively.
Southern Company also has other operating lease agreements with various terms and expiration dates. Total operating lease expenses were $186 million, $184 million, and $187 million for 2009, 2008, and $181 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Southern Company includes any step rents, escalations, and lease concessions in its computation of minimum lease payments, which are recognized on a straight-line basis over the minimum lease term.

II-97


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
At December 31, 2008,2009, estimated minimum lease payments for noncancelable operating leases were as follows:
                                
 Minimum Lease Payments Minimum Lease Payments
 Plant Daniel Barges & Rail Cars Other Total Plant Daniel Barges & Rail Cars Other Total
 (in millions) (in millions)
2009 $29 $66 $48 $143 
2010 28 46 42 116  $28 $70 $46 $144 
2011 28 34 34 96  28 57 38 123 
2012  21 25 46   40 29 69 
2013  18 17 35   32 22 54 
2014 and thereafter  40  106  146 
2014  27 18 45 
2015 and thereafter  28 96 124 
Total $85 $225 $272 $582  $56 $254 $249 $559 
For the traditional operating companies, a majority of the barge and rail car lease expenses are recoverable through fuel cost recovery provisions. In addition to the above rental commitments, Alabama Power and Georgia Power have obligations upon expiration of certain leases with respect to the residual value of the leased property. These leases expire in 2010, 2011, and 2013, and the maximum obligations are $61 million, $40 million, and $19 million, respectively. At the termination of the leases, the lessee may either exercise its purchase option, or the property can be sold to a third party. Alabama Power and Georgia Power expect that the fair market value of the leased property would substantially reduce or eliminate the payments under the residual value obligations. However, due to the recessionary economy, it is possible that the fair market value of the leased property would not eliminate the payments under the residual value obligations on the leases expiring in 2010.
Guarantees
Prior to the Mirant spin-off, Southern Company made separate guarantees to certain counterparties regarding performance of contractual commitments by Mirant’s trading and marketing subsidiaries. The total notional amount of the guarantees is not material.
As discussed earlier in this Note under “Operating Leases,” Alabama Power, Georgia Power, and Mississippi Power have entered into certain residual value guarantees.
8. COMMON STOCK
Stock Issued
In 2009, Southern Company issued 22.6 million shares of common stock for $673 million through the Southern Investment Plan and employee and director stock plans. In addition, Southern Company issued 19.9 million shares of common stock through at-the-market issuances pursuant to sales agency agreements related to Southern Company’s continuous equity offering program and received cash proceeds of $613 million, net of $6 million in fees and commissions. In 2008, Southern Company raised $474 million from the issuance of 14.1 million new common shares underthrough the Company’s variousSouthern Investment Plan and employee and director stock programs. In 2007, plans.

II-83


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company raised $379 million from the issuance of 11.6 million new common shares and $159 million from the re-issuance of 5.3 million shares of treasury stock under the Company’s various stock programs.Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Shares Reserved
At December 31, 2008,2009, a total of 7291 million shares were reserved for issuance pursuant to the Southern Investment Plan, the Employee Savings Plan, the Outside Directors Stock Plan, and the Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan (which includes the stock option plan discussed below).
Stock Option Plan
Southern Company provides non-qualified stock options to a large segment of its employees ranging from line management to executives. As of December 31, 2008,2009, there were 7,0097,563 current and former employees participating in the stock option plan, and there were 33.221 million shares of common stock remaining available for awards under this plan. The prices of options granted to date have been at the fair market value of the shares on the dates of grant. Options granted to date become exercisable pro rata over a maximum period of three years from the date of grant.

II-98


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Southern Company generally recognizes stock option expense on a straight-line basis over the vesting period which equates to the requisite service period; however, for employees who are eligible for retirement, the total cost is expensed at the grant date. Options outstanding will expire no later than 10 years after the date of grant, unless terminated earlier by the Southern Company Board of Directors in accordance with the stock option plan. For certain stock option awards, a change in control will provide accelerated vesting.
The estimated fair values of stock options granted in 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007 were derived using the Black-Scholes stock option pricing model. Expected volatility was based on historical volatility of Southern Company’s stock over a period equal to the expected term. Southern Company used historical exercise data to estimate the expected term that represents the period of time that options granted to employees are expected to be outstanding. The risk-free rate was based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant that covers the expected term of the stock options. The following table shows the assumptions used in the pricing model and the weighted average grant-date fair value of stock options granted:
                        
Year Ended December 31 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
Expected volatility  13.1%  14.8%  16.9%  15.6%  13.1%  14.8%
Expected term(in years)
 5.0 5.0 5.0  5.0 5.0 5.0 
Interest rate  2.8%  4.6%  4.6%  1.9%  2.8%  4.6%
Dividend yield  4.5%  4.3%  4.4%  5.4%  4.5%  4.3%
Weighted average grant-date fair value $2.37 $4.12 $4.15  $1.80 $2.37 $4.12 
Southern Company’s activity in the stock option plan for 20082009 is summarized below:
                
 Shares Subject Weighted Average Shares Subject Weighted Average
 To Option Exercise Price To Option Exercise Price
Outstanding at December 31, 2007 34,074,622 $30.77 
Outstanding at December 31, 2008 36,941,273 $32.09 
Granted 7,084,902 35.78  12,292,239 31.38 
Exercised  (4,112,651) 27.42   (879,555) 21.97 
Cancelled  (105,600) 34.70   (106,638) 32.48 
Outstanding at December 31, 2008
 36,941,273 $32.09 
Outstanding at December 31, 2009
 48,247,319 $32.10 
Exercisable at December 31, 2008
 24,194,943 $30.20 
Exercisable at December 31, 2009
 30,209,272 $31.57 
The number of stock options vested, and expected to vest in the future, as of December 31, 20082009 was not significantly different from the number of stock options outstanding at December 31, 20082009 as stated above. As of December 31, 2008,2009, the weighted average remaining contractual term for the options outstanding and options exercisable was 6.36 years and 5.15 years, respectively, and the aggregate intrinsic value for the options outstanding and options exercisable was $181$100 million and $165$77 million, respectively.
As of December 31, 2008,2009, there was $7$6 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to stock option awards not yet vested. That cost is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 10 months.
For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006,2007, total compensation cost for stock option awards recognized in income was $20$23 million, $28$20 million, and $28 million, respectively, with the related tax benefit also recognized in income of $8$9 million, $11$8 million, and $11 million, respectively.

II-84


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007 and 2006 was $9 million, $45 million, $81 million, and $36$81 million, respectively. The actual tax benefit realized by the Company for the tax deductions from stock option exercises totaled $4 million, $17 million, $31 million, and $14$31 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006.

II-99


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
2007.
Southern Company has a policy of issuing shares to satisfy share option exercises. Cash received from issuances related to option exercises under the share-based payment arrangements for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007 and 2006 was $19 million, $113 million, $195 million, and $77$195 million, respectively.
Diluted Earnings Per Share
For Southern Company, the only difference in computing basic and diluted earnings per share is attributable to outstanding options under the stock option plan. The effect of the stock options was determined using the treasury stock method. Shares used to compute diluted earnings per share are as follows:
                        
 Average Common Stock Shares Average Common Stock Shares
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
  
As reported shares 771,039 756,350 743,146  794,795 771,039 756,350 
Effect of options 3,809 4,666 4,739  1,620 3,809 4,666 
Diluted shares 774,848 761,016 747,885  796,415 774,848 761,016 
The reduction in the effect of options for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 compared to 2007 is primarily due to the anti-dilutive nature of certain stock options outstanding that have an exercise price that exceeds the average stock price of Southern Company shares in the year ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, there were 37.7 million and 6.8 million stock options outstanding, respectively, that were not included in the diluted earnings per share calculation because they were anti-dilutive. Assuming an average stock price of $38.01 (the highest exercise price of the anti-dilutive options outstanding), the effect of options for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 would have increased by 3.4 million and 0.3 million shares, respectively.
Common Stock Dividend Restrictions
The income of Southern Company is derived primarily from equity in earnings of its subsidiaries. At December 31, 2008,2009, consolidated retained earnings included $5.3$5.6 billion of undistributed retained earnings of the subsidiaries. Southern Power’s credit facility contains potential limitations on the payment of common stock dividends; as of December 31, 2008,2009, Southern Power was in compliance with all such requirements.
9. NUCLEAR INSURANCE
Under the Price-Anderson Amendments Act (Act), Alabama Power and Georgia Power maintain agreements of indemnity with the NRC that, together with private insurance, cover third-party liability arising from any nuclear incident occurring at the companies’ nuclear power plants. The Act provides funds up to $12.5$12.6 billion for public liability claims that could arise from a single nuclear incident. Each nuclear plant is insured against this liability to a maximum of $300$375 million by American Nuclear Insurers (ANI), with the remaining coverage provided by a mandatory program of deferred premiums that could be assessed, after a nuclear incident, against all owners of commercial nuclear reactors. A company could be assessed up to $117.5 million per incident for each licensed reactor it operates but not more than an aggregate of $17.5 million per incident to be paid in a calendar year for each reactor. Such maximum assessment, excluding any applicable state premium taxes, for Alabama Power and Georgia Power, based on its ownership and buyback interests, is $235 million and $237 million, respectively, per incident, but not more than an aggregate of $35 million per company to be paid for each incident in any one year. Both the maximum assessment per reactor and the maximum yearly assessment are adjusted for inflation at least every five years. The next scheduled adjustment is due no later than October 29, 2013.
Alabama Power and Georgia Power are members of Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL), a mutual insurer established to provide property damage insurance in an amount up to $500 million for members’ nuclear generating facilities.
Additionally, both companies have policies that currently provide decontamination, excess property insurance, and premature decommissioning coverage up to $2.25 billion for losses in excess of the $500 million primary coverage. This excess insurance is also provided by NEIL. In the event of a loss, the amount of insurance available may not be adequate to cover property damage and other incurred expenses.

II-85


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
NEIL also covers the additional costs that would be incurred in obtaining replacement power during a prolonged accidental outage at a member’s nuclear plant. Members can purchase this coverage, subject to a deductible waiting period of up to 26 weeks, with a maximum per occurrence per unit limit of $490 million. After the deductible

II-100


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
period, weekly indemnity payments would be received until either the unit is operational or until the limit is exhausted in approximately three years. Alabama Power and Georgia Power each purchase the maximum limit allowed by NEIL, subject to ownership limitations. Each facility has elected a 12-week deductible waiting period.
Under each of the NEIL policies, members are subject to assessments if losses each year exceed the accumulated funds available to the insurer under that policy. The current maximum annual assessments for Alabama Power and Georgia Power under the NEIL policies would be $39$38 million and $51$50 million, respectively.
Claims resulting from terrorist acts are covered under both the ANI and NEIL policies (subject to normal policy limits). The aggregate, however, that NEIL will pay for all claims resulting from terrorist acts in any 12-month period is $3.2 billion plus such additional amounts NEIL can recover through reinsurance, indemnity, or other sources.
For all on-site property damage insurance policies for commercial nuclear power plants, the NRC requires that the proceeds of such policies shall be dedicated first for the sole purpose of placing the reactor in a safe and stable condition after an accident. Any remaining proceeds are to be applied next toward the costs of decontamination and debris removal operations ordered by the NRC, and any further remaining proceeds are to be paid either to the company or to its bond trustees as may be appropriate under the policies and applicable trust indentures.
All retrospective assessments, whether generated for liability, property, or replacement power, may be subject to applicable state premium taxes.
10. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
On January 1, 2008, Southern Company adopted FASB Statement No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (SFAS No. 157) which defines fairFair value establishes a framework for measuring fair value, and requires additional disclosures about fair value measurements. The criterion that is set forth in SFAS No. 157 is applicable to fair value measurement where it is permitted or required under other accounting pronouncements.
SFAS No. 157 defines fair value as the exit price, which is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The fair value measurement ismeasurements are based on inputs of observable and unobservable market data that a market participant would use in pricing the asset or liability. The use of observable inputs is maximized where available and the use of unobservable inputs is minimized for fair value measurement. As a means to illustrate the inputs used, SFAS No. 157 establishesmeasurement and reflects a three-tier fair value hierarchy that prioritizes inputs to valuation techniques used for fair value measurement.
Level 1 consists of observable market data in an active market for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2 consists of observable market data, other than that included in Level 1, that is either directly or indirectly observable.
Level 3 consists of unobservable market data. The input may reflect the assumptions of the Company of what a market participant would use in pricing an asset or liability. If there is little available market data, then the Company’s own assumptions are the best available information.
Level 1 consists of observable market data in an active market for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2 consists of observable market data, other than that included in Level 1, that is either directly or indirectly observable.
Level 3 consists of unobservable market data. The input may reflect the assumptions of the Company of what a market participant would use in pricing an asset or liability. If there is little available market data, then the Company’s own assumptions are the best available information.
In the case of multiple inputs being used in a fair value measurement, the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement represents the level in the fair value hierarchy in which the fair value measurement is reported.

II-101II-86


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
The adoptionAs of SFAS No. 157 has not resulted in any significant changes to the methodologies used for fair value measurement. Primarily all the changes in the fair value ofDecember 31, 2009, assets and liabilities are recorded in other comprehensive income or regulatory assets and liabilities, and thus the impact on earnings is limited to derivatives that do not qualify for hedge accounting.
Themeasured at fair value measurements performed on a recurring basis andduring the period, together with the level of the fair value hierarchy in which they fall, at December 31, 2008 are as follows:
                                
At December 31, 2008: Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total
 Fair Value Measurements Using  
 Quoted Prices      
 in Active Significant    
 Markets for Other Significant  
 Identical Observable Unobservable  
 Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2009: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
 (in millions)     (in millions) 
Assets:  
Energy-related derivatives $ $22 $ $22  $ $7 $ $7 
Nuclear decommissioning trusts(a)
 498 364  862 
Interest rate derivatives  3  3 
Nuclear decommissioning trusts:(a)
 
Domestic equity 724 50  774 
U.S. Treasury and government agency securities 11 36  47 
Municipal bonds  23  23 
Corporate bonds  137  137 
Mortgage and asset backed securities  65  65 
Other  22  22 
Cash equivalents and restricted cash 469   469  623   623 
Other 2 46 35 83  3 48 35 86 
Total fair value $969 $432 $35 $1,436 
Total $1,361 $391 $35 $1,787 
  
Liabilities:  
Energy-related derivatives $ $307 $ $307  $ $185 $ $185 
Interest rate derivatives  40  40   6  6 
Total fair value $ $347 $ $347 
Total $ $191 $ $191 
(a) Excludes receivables related to investment income, pending investment sales, and payables related to pending investment purchases.
Energy-related derivatives and interest rate derivatives primarily consist of over-the-counter contracts. See Note 6 under “Financial Instruments”11 for additional information. The nuclear decommissioning trust funds are invested in a diversified mix of equity and fixed income securities. See Note 1 under “Nuclear Decommissioning” for additional information. The cash equivalents and restricted cash consist of securities with original maturities of 90 days or less. “Other” represents marketable securities and certain deferred compensation funds also invested in various marketable securities. All of these financial instruments and investments are valued primarily using the market approach.
Changes inAs of December 31, 2009, the fair value measurementmeasurements of investments calculated at net asset value per share (or its equivalent), as well as the Level 3 items for the year ended December 31, 2008nature and risks of those investments, are as follows:
     
  Level 3
  Other
  (in millions)
Beginning balance at December 31, 2007 $50 
Total gains (losses) — realized/unrealized:    
Included in other comprehensive income  (12)
Purchases, issuances and settlements  1 
Transfers in and/or out of Level 3  (4)
 
Ending balance at December 31, 2008 $35 
 
                 
  Fair Unfunded Redemption Redemption
As of December 31, 2009: Value Commitments Frequency Notice Period
  (in millions)              
Nuclear decommissioning trusts:                
Corporate bonds – commingled funds $14  None Daily  1 to 3 days 
Other – commingled funds  13  None Daily Not applicable
Trust owned life insurance  78  None Daily 15 days
Cash equivalents and restricted cash:                
Money market funds  623  None Daily Not applicable
Other:                
Deferred compensation — money market funds  3  None Daily Not applicable

II-102II-87


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
The commingled funds in the nuclear decommissioning trusts invest primarily in a diversified portfolio of investment high grade money market instruments, including, but not limited to, commercial paper, notes, repurchase agreements, and other evidences of indebtedness with a maturity not exceeding 13 months from the date of purchase. The commingled funds will, however, maintain a dollar-weighted average portfolio maturity of 90 days or less. The assets may be longer term investment grade fixed income obligations having a maximum five year final maturity with put features or floating rates with a reset rate date of 13 months or less. The primary objective for the commingled funds is a high level of current income consistent with stability of principal and liquidity.
One of the nuclear decommissioning trusts includes investments in Trust-Owned Life Insurance (TOLI). The taxable nuclear decommissioning trust invests in the TOLI in order to minimize the impact of taxes on the portfolio and can draw on the value of the TOLI through death proceeds, loans against the cash surrender value, and/or the cash surrender value, subject to legal restrictions. The amounts reported in the tables above reflect the fair value of investments the insurer has made in relation to the TOLI agreements. The nuclear decommissioning trust does not own the underlying investments, but the fair value of the investments approximates the cash surrender value of the TOLI policies. The investments made by the insurer are in commingled funds. The commingled funds primarily include investments in domestic and international equity securities and predominantly high-quality fixed income securities. These fixed income securities include U.S. Treasury and government agency fixed income securities, non-U.S. government and agency fixed income securities, domestic and foreign corporate fixed income securities, and, to some degree, mortgage and asset backed securities. The passively managed funds seek to replicate the performance of a related index. The actively managed funds seek to exceed the performance of a related index through security analysis and selection.
The money market funds are short-term investments of excess funds in various money market mutual funds, which are portfolios of short-term debt securities. The money market funds are regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission and typically receive the highest rating from credit rating agencies. Regulatory and rating agency requirements for money market funds include minimum credit ratings and maximum maturities for individual securities and a maximum weighted average portfolio maturity. Redemptions are available on a same day basis up to the full amount of the Company’s investment in the money market funds.
Changes in the fair value measurement of the Level 3 items using significant unobservable inputs for Southern Company at December 31, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:
     
  Level 3
  Other
  (in millions)
Beginning balance at December 31, 2008 $35 
Total gains (losses) — realized/unrealized:    
Included in earnings  (3)
Included in other comprehensive income  3 
 
Ending balance at December 31, 2009
 $35 
 
Unrealized losses of $3 million were included in earnings during 2009 relating to assets still held at December 31, 2009 and are recorded in “depreciation and amortization.”
As of December 31, 2009, other financial instruments for which the carrying amount did not equal fair value were as follows:
         
  Carrying Amount Fair Value
  (in millions)
Long-term debt:        
2009
 $19,145  $19,567 
2008 $17,327  $17,114 
The fair values were based on either closing market prices (Level 1) or closing prices of comparable instruments (Level 2).

II-88


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
11. DERIVATIVES
Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power are exposed to market risks, primarily commodity price risk and interest rate risk. To manage the volatility attributable to these exposures, each company nets its exposures, where possible, to take advantage of natural offsets and enters into various derivative transactions for the remaining exposures pursuant to each company’s policies in areas such as counterparty exposure and risk management practices. Each company’s policy is that derivatives are to be used primarily for hedging purposes and mandates strict adherence to all applicable risk management policies. Derivative positions are monitored using techniques including, but not limited to, market valuation, value at risk, stress testing, and sensitivity analysis. Derivative instruments are recognized at fair value in the balance sheets as either assets or liabilities.
Energy-Related Derivatives
The traditional operating companies and Southern Power enter into energy-related derivatives to hedge exposures to electricity, gas, and other fuel price changes. However, due to cost-based rate regulations, the traditional operating companies have limited exposure to market volatility in commodity fuel prices and prices of electricity. Each of the traditional operating companies manages fuel-hedging programs, implemented per the guidelines of their respective state PSCs, through the use of financial derivative contracts. Southern Power has limited exposure to market volatility in commodity fuel prices and prices of electricity because its long-term sales contracts shift substantially all fuel cost responsibility to the purchaser. However, Southern Power has been and may continue to be exposed to market volatility in energy-related commodity prices as a result of sales of uncontracted generating capacity.
To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in electricity prices, the Company enters into physical fixed-price or heat rate contracts for the purchase and sale of electricity through the wholesale electricity market. To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in gas prices, the Company may enter into fixed-price contracts for natural gas purchases; however, a significant portion of contracts are priced at market.
Energy-related derivative contracts are accounted for in one of three methods:
Regulatory Hedges– Energy-related derivative contracts which are designated as regulatory hedges relate primarily to the traditional operating companies’ fuel hedging programs, where gains and losses are initially recorded as regulatory liabilities and assets, respectively, and then are included in fuel expense as the underlying fuel is used in operations and ultimately recovered through the respective fuel cost recovery clauses.
Cash Flow Hedges– Gains and losses on energy-related derivatives designated as cash flow hedges are used to hedge anticipated purchases and sales and are initially deferred in other comprehensive income (OCI) before being recognized in income in the same period as the hedged transactions are reflected in earnings.
Not Designated– Gains and losses on energy-related derivative contracts that are not designated or fail to qualify as hedges are recognized in the statements of income as incurred.
Some energy-related derivative contracts require physical delivery as opposed to financial settlement, and this type of derivative is both common and prevalent within the electric industry. When an energy-related derivative contract is settled physically, any cumulative unrealized gain or loss is reversed and the contract price is recognized in the respective line item representing the actual price of the underlying goods being delivered.

II-89


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
At December 31, 2009, the net volume of energy-related derivative contracts for power and natural gas positions for Southern Company, together with the longest hedge date over which it is hedging its exposure to the variability in future cash flows for forecasted transactions and the longest date for derivatives not designated as hedges, were as follows:
                     
Power  Gas 
  Longest  Longest  Net  Longest  Longest 
Net Sold Hedge  Non-Hedge  Purchased  Hedge  Non-Hedge 
Megawatt-hours Date  Date  mmBtu  Date  Date 
(in millions)         (in millions)         
2.6  2010   2010   154*  2014   2014 
*Includes location basis of 2 million British thermal units (mmBtu).
For cash flow hedges, the amounts expected to be reclassified from OCI to revenue and fuel expense for the next 12-month period ending December 31, 2010 are immaterial.
Interest Rate Derivatives
Southern Company and certain subsidiaries also enter into interest rate derivatives, which include forward-starting interest rate swaps, to hedge exposure to changes in interest rates. Derivatives related to existing variable rate securities or forecasted transactions are accounted for as cash flow hedges. The derivatives employed as hedging instruments are structured to minimize ineffectiveness.
For cash flow hedges, the fair value gains or losses are recorded in OCI and are reclassified into earnings at the same time the hedged transactions affect earnings.
At December 31, 2009, Southern Company had a total of $976 million notional amount of interest rate derivatives outstanding with net fair value losses of $3 million as follows:
                     
          Weighted     Fair Value 
          Average     Gain (Loss) 
  Notional  Variable Rate Fixed Rate Hedge Maturity December 31, 
  Amount  Received Paid Date 2009 
  (in millions)              (in millions) 
Cash flow hedges of existing debt
                    
  $576  SIFMA* Index  2.69% February 2010 $(4)
   300  1-month LIBOR  2.43% April 2010  (2)
Cash flow hedges on forecasted debt
                    
   100  3-month LIBOR  3.79% April 2020  3 
                
Total $976              $(3)
                
*Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association Municipal Swap Index (SIFMA)
For the year ended December 31, 2009, the Company had realized net losses of $19 million upon termination of certain interest rate derivatives at the same time the related debt was issued. The effective portion of these losses has been deferred in OCI and is being amortized to interest expense over the life of the original interest rate derivative, reflecting the period in which the forecasted hedged transaction affects earnings.
The estimated pre-tax losses that will be reclassified from OCI to interest expense for the next 12-month period ending December 31, 2010 is $25 million. The Company has deferred gains and losses that are expected to be amortized into earnings through 2037.

II-90


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Derivative Financial Statement Presentation and Amounts
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the fair value of energy-related derivatives and interest rate derivatives was reflected in the balance sheets as follows:
                     
  Asset Derivatives Liability Derivatives
  Balance Sheet         Balance Sheet    
Derivative Category Location 2009 2008 Location 2009 2008
    (in millions)   (in millions)
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments for regulatory purposes
                    
Energy-related derivatives: Other current
assets
 $1  $10  Liabilities from risk
management activities
 $111  $215 
  Other deferred
charges and assets
  1     Other deferred
credits and liabilities
  66   83 
 
Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments for regulatory purposes
   $2  $10    $177  $298 
 
                     
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments in cash flow hedges
                    
Energy-related derivatives: Other current
assets
 $3  $  Liabilities from risk
management activities
 $5  $1 
Interest rate derivatives: Other current
assets
  3     Liabilities from risk management activities  6   37 
  Other deferred
charges and assets
       Other deferred credits
and liabilities
     3 
 
Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments in cash flow hedges
   $6  $    $11  $41 
 
                     
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments
                    
Energy-related derivatives: Other current
assets
 $2  $12  Liabilities from risk
management activities
 $3  $8 
 
 
Total
   $10  $22    $191  $347 
 
 
All derivative instruments are measured at fair value. See Note 10 for additional information.

At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the pre-tax effect of unrealized derivative gains (losses) arising from energy-related derivative instruments designated as regulatory hedging instruments and deferred on the balance sheets were as follows:
 
  Unrealized Losses Unrealized Gains
  Balance Sheet         Balance Sheet    
Derivative Category Location 2009 2008 Location 2009 2008
    (in millions)   (in millions)
Energy-related derivatives: Other regulatory assets, current $(111) $(215) Other regulatory liabilities, current $1  $10 
  Other regulatory assets, deferred  (66)  (83) Other regulatory liabilities, deferred  1    
 
Total energy-related derivative gains (losses)
   $(177) $(298)   $2  $10 
 

II-91


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, the pre-tax effect of energy-related derivatives and interest rate derivatives designated as cash flow hedging instruments on the statements of income were as follows:
                         
  Gain (Loss) Recognized in Gain (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated OCI into Income
Derivatives in Cash Flow OCI on Derivative (Effective Portion)
Hedging Relationships (Effective Portion)    Amount
Derivative Category 2009 2008 2007 Statements of Income Location 2009 2008 2007
  (in millions)    (in millions)
Energy-related derivatives $(2) $(1) $(2) Fuel $— $  $ 
Interest rate derivatives   (5)  (47)  (7) Interest expense   (46)  (19)  (15)
 
Total $(7) $(48) $(9)     $(46) $(19) $(15)
 
There was no material ineffectiveness recorded in earnings for any period presented.
For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, the pre-tax effect of energy-related derivatives not designated as hedging instruments on the statements of income were as follows:
               
Derivatives not Designated Unrealized Gain (Loss) Recognized in Income
as Hedging Instruments   Amount
Derivative Category Statements of Income Location 2009 2008 2007
    (in millions)
Energy-related derivatives: Wholesale revenues $5  $(2) $ 
  Fuel  (6)  5    
  Purchased power  (4)  (2)   
  Other income (expense), net        30*
 
Total   $(5) $1  $30 
 
*Includes a $27 million unrealized gain related to derivatives in place to reduce exposure to a phase-out of certain income tax credits related to synthetic fuel production in 2007.
Contingent Features
The Company does not have any credit arrangements that would require material changes in payment schedules or terminations as a result of a credit rating downgrade. There are certain derivatives that could require collateral, but not accelerated payment, in the event of various credit rating changes of certain Southern Company subsidiaries. At December 31, 2009, the fair value of derivative liabilities with contingent features was $33 million.
At December 31, 2009, the Company had no collateral posted with their derivative counterparties. The maximum potential collateral requirement arising from the credit-risk-related contingent features, at a rating below BBB- and/or Baa3, is $33 million. Generally, collateral may be provided by a Southern Company guaranty, letter of credit, or cash. Included in these amounts are certain agreements that could require collateral in the event that one or more Southern Company system power pool participants has a credit rating change to below investment grade.
Currently, the Company has investment grade credit ratings from the major rating agencies with respect to its debt.

II-92


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
12. SEGMENT AND RELATED INFORMATION
Southern Company’s reportable business segments are the sale of electricity in the Southeast by the four traditional operating companies and Southern Power. Southern Power’s revenues from sales to the traditional operating companies were $544 million, $638 million, and $547 million in 2009, 2008, and $492 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. The “All Other” column includes parent Southern Company, which does not allocate operating expenses to business segments. Also, this category includes segments below the quantitative threshold for separate disclosure. These segments include investments in telecommunications energy-related services, and leveraged lease projects. Also included are investments in synthetic fuels for 2007 and 2006.2007. In addition, see Note 1 under “Related Party Transactions” for information regarding revenues from services for synthetic fuel production that are included in the cost of fuel purchased by Alabama Power and Georgia Power. All other intersegment revenues are not material. Financial data for business segments and products and services are as follows:
                             
  Electric Utilities      
  Traditional                
  Operating Southern         All    
  Companies Power Eliminations Total Other Eliminations Consolidated
  (in millions)
2009
                            
Operating revenues
 $15,304  $947  $(609) $15,642  $165  $(64) $15,743 
Depreciation and amortization
  1,378   98      1,476   27      1,503 
Interest income
  21         21   3   (1)  23 
Interest expense
  749   85      834   71      905 
Income taxes
  902   86      988   (92)     896 
Segment net income (loss)*
  1,679   156      1,835   (193)  1   1,643 
Total assets
  48,403   3,043   (143)  51,303   1,223   (480)  52,046 
Gross property additions
  4,568   331      4,899   14      4,913 
 
 
2008                            
Operating revenues $16,521  $1,314  $(835) $17,000  $182  $(55) $17,127 
Depreciation and amortization  1,325   89      1,414   29      1,443 
Interest income  32   1      33         33 
Interest expense  689   83      772   94      866 
Income taxes  944   93      1,037   (122)     915 
Segment net income (loss)*  1,703   144      1,847   (104)  (1)  1,742 
Total assets  44,794   2,813   (139)  47,468   1,407   (528)  48,347 
Gross property additions  4,058   50      4,108   14      4,122 
 
 
2007                            
Operating revenues $14,851  $972  $(683) $15,140  $380  $(167) $15,353 
Depreciation and amortization  1,141   74      1,215   30      1,245 
Interest income  31   1      32   14   (1)  45 
Interest expense  685   79      764   122      886 
Income taxes  866   84      950   (115)     835 
Segment net income (loss)*  1,582   132      1,714   22   (2)  1,734 
Total assets  41,812   2,769   (122)  44,459   1,767   (437)  45,789 
Gross property additions  3,465   184   (4)  3,645   13      3,658 
 
*After dividends on preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries
Products and Services
                 
Electric Utilities’ Revenues
Year Retail Wholesale Other Total
  (in millions)
2009
 $13,307  $1,802  $533  $15,642 
2008  14,055   2,400   545   17,000 
2007  12,639   1,988   513   15,140 
 

II-103II-93


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
Business Segments
                             
  Electric Utilities      
  Traditional                
  Operating Southern         All    
  Companies Power Eliminations Total Other Eliminations Consolidated
  (in millions)
2008
                            
Operating revenues
 $16,521  $1,314  $(835) $17,000  $182  $(55) $17,127 
Depreciation and amortization
  1,325   89      1,414   29      1,443 
Interest income
  32   1      33         33 
Interest expense
  689   83      772   94      866 
Income taxes
  944   93      1,037   (122)     915 
Segment net income (loss)
  1,703   144      1,847   (104)  (1)  1,742 
Total assets
  44,794   2,813   (139)  47,468   1,407   (528)  48,347 
Gross property additions
  4,058   50      4,108   14      4,122 
 
                             
  Electric Utilities      
  Traditional                
  Operating Southern         All    
  Companies Power Eliminations Total Other Eliminations Consolidated
  (in millions)
2007                            
Operating revenues $14,851  $972  $(683) $15,140  $380  $(167) $15,353 
Depreciation and amortization  1,141   74      1,215   30      1,245 
Interest income  31   1      32   14   (1)  45 
Interest expense  685   79      764   122      886 
Income taxes  866   84      950   (115)     835 
Segment net income (loss)  1,582   132      1,714   22   (2)  1,734 
Total assets  41,812   2,769   (122)  44,459   1,767   (437)  45,789 
Gross property additions  3,465   184   (4)  3,645   13      3,658 
 
                             
  Electric Utilities      
  Traditional                
  Operating Southern         All    
  Companies Power Eliminations Total Other Eliminations Consolidated
  (in millions)
2006                            
Operating revenues $13,920  $777  $(609) $14,088  $413  $(145) $14,356 
Depreciation and amortization  1,098   66      1,164   37   (1)  1,200 
Interest income  33   2      35   7   (1)  41 
Interest expense  637   80      717   149      866 
Income taxes  867   82      949   (169)     780 
Segment net income (loss)  1,462   124      1,586   (11)  (2)  1,573 
Total assets  38,825   2,691   (110)  41,406   1,933   (481)  42,858 
Gross property additions  2,561   501   (16)  3,046   26      3,072 
 
Products and Services
                 
Electric Utilities’ Revenues
Year Retail Wholesale Other Total
  (in millions)
2008
 $14,055  $2,400  $545  $17,000 
2007  12,639   1,988   513   15,140 
2006  11,801   1,822   465   14,088 
 

II-104


NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
12.13. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL INFORMATION (UNAUDITED)
Summarized quarterly financial data for 20082009 and 20072008 are as follows:
                            
                             Consolidated  
    Net Income After  
 Per Common Share  Dividends on Per Common Share
 Trading  Preferred and Trading
 Operating Operating Consolidated Basic   Price Range  Operating Operating Preference Stock Basic Price Range
Quarter Ended Revenues Income Net Income Earnings Dividends High Low  Revenues Income of Subsidiaries Earnings Dividends High Low
(in millions)  (in millions) 
March 2009
 $3,666 $490 $126* $0.16* $0.4200 $37.62 $26.48 
June 2009
 3,885 886 478 0.61 0.4375 32.05 27.19 
September 2009
 4,682 1,415 790 0.99 0.4375 32.67 30.27 
December 2009
 3,510 477 249 0.31 0.4375 34.47 30.89 
March 2008
 $3,683 $708 $359 $0.47 $0.4025 $40.60 $33.71  $3,683 $708 $359 $0.47 $0.4025 $40.60 $33.71 
June 2008
 4,215 924 417 0.54 0.4200 37.81 34.28  4,215 924 417 0.54 0.4200 37.81 34.28 
September 2008
 5,427 1,405 780 1.01 0.4200 40.00 34.46  5,427 1,405 780 1.01 0.4200 40.00 34.46 
December 2008
 3,802 469 186 0.24 0.4200 38.18 29.82  3,802 469 186 0.24 0.4200 38.18 29.82 
 
March 2007 $3,409 $691 $339 $0.45 $0.3875 $37.25 $34.85 
June 2007 3,772 844 429 0.57 0.4025 38.90 33.50 
September 2007 4,832 1,382 762 1.00 0.4025 37.70 33.16 
December 2007 3,340 409 204 0.27 0.4025 39.35 35.15 
Southern Company’s business is influenced by seasonal weather conditions.
*Southern Company’s MC Asset Recovery litigation settlement reduced earnings by $202 million, or 25 cents per share, during the first quarter of 2009.

II-105II-94


SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA
For the Periods Ended December 20042005 through 20082009
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
                                        
 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004  2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 
 
Operating Revenues (in millions)
 $17,127 $15,353 $14,356 $13,554 $11,729  $15,743 $17,127 $15,353 $14,356 $13,554 
Total Assets (in millions)
 $48,347 $45,789 $42,858 $39,877 $36,955  $52,046 $48,347 $45,789 $42,858 $39,877 
Gross Property Additions (in millions)
 $4,122 $3,658 $3,072 $2,476 $2,099  $4,913 $4,122 $3,658 $3,072 $2,476 
Return on Average Common Equity (percent)
 13.57 14.60 14.26 15.17 15.38  11.67 13.57 14.60 14.26 15.17 
Cash Dividends Paid Per Share of Common Stock
 $1.6625 $1.595 $1.535 $1.475 $1.415  $1.7325 $1.6625 $1.595 $1.535 $1.475 
Consolidated Net Income (in millions):
 $1,742 $1,734 $1,573 $1,591 $1,532 
Consolidated Net Income After Dividends on Preferred and Preference Stock of Subsidiaries (in millions)
 $1,643 $1,742 $1,734 $1,573 $1,591 
Earnings Per Share —
  
Basic $2.26 $2.29 $2.12 $2.14 $2.07  $2.07 $2.26 $2.29 $2.12 $2.14 
Diluted 2.25 2.28 2.10 2.13 2.06  2.06 2.25 2.28 2.10 2.13 
Capitalization (in millions):
  
Common stock equity $13,276 $12,385 $11,371 $10,689 $10,278  $14,878 $13,276 $12,385 $11,371 $10,689 
Preferred and preference stock 1,082 1,080 744 596 561 
Preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries 707 707 707 246 98 
Redeemable preferred stock of subsidiaries 375 375 373 498 498 
Long-term debt 16,816 14,143 12,503 12,846 12,449  18,131 16,816 14,143 12,503 12,846 
Total (excluding amounts due within one year) $31,174 $27,608 $24,618 $24,131 $23,288  $34,091 $31,174 $27,608 $24,618 $24,131 
Capitalization Ratios (percent):
  
Common stock equity 42.6 44.9 46.2 44.3 44.1  43.6 42.6 44.9 46.2 44.3 
Preferred and preference stock 3.5 3.9 3.0 2.5 2.4 
Preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries 2.1 2.3 2.6 1.0 0.4 
Redeemable preferred stock of subsidiaries 1.1 1.2 1.3 2.0 2.1 
Long-term debt 53.9 51.2 50.8 53.2 53.5  53.2 53.9 51.2 50.8 53.2 
Total (excluding amounts due within one year) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0  100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 
Other Common Stock Data:
  
Book value per share $17.08 $16.23 $15.24 $14.42 $13.86  $18.15 $17.08 $16.23 $15.24 $14.42 
Market price per share:  
High $40.60 $39.35 $37.40 $36.47 $33.96  $37.62 $40.60 $39.35 $37.40 $36.47 
Low 29.82 33.16 30.48 31.14 27.44  26.48 29.82 33.16 30.48 31.14 
Close (year-end) 37.00 38.75 36.86 34.53 33.52  33.32 37.00 38.75 36.86 34.53 
Market-to-book ratio (year-end) (percent) 216.6 238.8 241.9 239.5 241.8  183.6 216.6 238.8 241.9 239.5 
Price-earnings ratio (year-end) (times) 16.4 16.9 17.4 16.1 16.2  16.1 16.4 16.9 17.4 16.1 
Dividends paid (in millions) $1,279 $1,204 $1,140 $1,098 $1,044  $1,369 $1,279 $1,204 $1,140 $1,098 
Dividend yield (year-end) (percent) 4.5 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.2  5.2 4.5 4.1 4.2 4.3 
Dividend payout ratio (percent) 73.5 69.5 72.4 69.0 68.3  83.3 73.5 69.5 72.4 69.0 
Shares outstanding (in thousands):  
Average 771,039 756,350 743,146 743,927 738,879  794,795 771,039 756,350 743,146 743,927 
Year-end 777,192 763,104 746,270 741,448 741,495  819,647 777,192 763,104 746,270 741,448 
Stockholders of record (year-end) 97,324 102,903 110,259 118,285 125,975  92,799 97,324 102,903 110,259 118,285 
Traditional Operating Company Customers (year-end) (in thousands):
    
Residential 3,785 3,756 3,706 3,642 3,600  3,798 3,785 3,756 3,706 3,642 
Commercial 594 600 596 586 578  580 594 600 596 586 
Industrial 15 15 15 15 14  15 15 15 15 15 
Other 8 6 5 5 5  9 8 6 5 5 
Total 4,402 4,377 4,322 4,248 4,197  4,402 4,402 4,377 4,322 4,248 
Employees (year-end)
 27,276 26,742 26,091 25,554 25,642  26,112 27,276 26,472 26,091 25,554 

II-106II-95


SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA
For the Periods Ended December 20042005 through 20082009
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
                                        
 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004  2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 
 
Operating Revenues (in millions):
  
Residential $5,476 $5,045 $4,716 $4,376 $3,848  $5,481 $5,476 $5,045 $4,716 $4,376 
Commercial 5,018 4,467 4,117 3,904 3,346  4,901 5,018 4,467 4,117 3,904 
Industrial 3,445 3,020 2,866 2,785 2,446  2,806 3,445 3,020 2,866 2,785 
Other 116 107 102 100 92  119 116 107 102 100 
Total retail 14,055 12,639 11,801 11,165 9,732  13,307 14,055 12,639 11,801 11,165 
Wholesale 2,400 1,988 1,822 1,667 1,341  1,802 2,400 1,988 1,822 1,667 
Total revenues from sales of electricity 16,455 14,627 13,623 12,832 11,073  15,109 16,455 14,627 13,623 12,832 
Other revenues 672 726 733 722 656  634 672 726 733 722 
Total $17,127 $15,353 $14,356 $13,554 $11,729  $15,743 $17,127 $15,353 $14,356 $13,554 
Kilowatt-Hour Sales (in millions):
  
Residential 52,262 53,326 52,383 51,082 49,702  51,690 52,262 53,326 52,383 51,082 
Commercial 54,427 54,665 52,987 51,857 50,037  53,526 54,427 54,665 52,987 51,857 
Industrial 52,636 54,662 55,044 55,141 56,399  46,422 52,636 54,662 55,044 55,141 
Other 934 962 920 996 1,005  953 934 962 920 996 
Total retail 160,259 163,615 161,334 159,076 157,143  152,591 160,259 163,615 161,334 159,076 
Sales for resale 39,368 40,745 38,460 37,072 34,568 
Wholesale sales 33,503 39,368 40,745 38,460 37,072 
Total 199,627 204,360 199,794 196,148 191,711  186,094 199,627 204,360 199,794 196,148 
Average Revenue Per Kilowatt-Hour (cents):
  
Residential 10.48 9.46 9.00 8.57 7.74  10.60 10.48 9.46 9.00 8.57 
Commercial 9.22 8.17 7.77 7.53 6.69  9.16 9.22 8.17 7.77 7.53 
Industrial 6.54 5.52 5.21 5.05 4.34  6.04 6.54 5.52 5.21 5.05 
Total retail 8.77 7.72 7.31 7.02 6.19  8.72 8.77 7.72 7.31 7.02 
Wholesale 6.10 4.88 4.74 4.50 3.88  5.38 6.10 4.88 4.74 4.50 
Total sales 8.24 7.16 6.82 6.54 5.78  8.12 8.24 7.16 6.82 6.54 
Average Annual Kilowatt-Hour
  
Use Per Residential Customer
 13,844 14,263 14,235 14,084 13,879  13,607 13,844 14,263 14,235 14,084 
Average Annual Revenue
  
Per Residential Customer
 $1,451 $1,349 $1,282 $1,207 $1,074  $1,443 $1,451 $1,349 $1,282 $1,207 
Plant Nameplate Capacity
  
Ratings (year-end) (megawatts)
 42,607 41,948 41,785 40,509 38,622  42,932 42,607 41,948 41,785 40,509 
Maximum Peak-Hour Demand (megawatts):
  
Winter 32,604 31,189 30,958 30,384 28,467  33,519 32,604 31,189 30,958 30,384 
Summer 37,166 38,777 35,890 35,050 34,414  34,471 37,166 38,777 35,890 35,050 
System Reserve Margin (at peak) (percent)
 15.3 11.2 17.1 14.4 20.2  26.4 15.3 11.2 17.1 14.4 
Annual Load Factor (percent)
 58.7 57.6 60.8 60.2 61.4  60.6 58.7 57.6 60.8 60.2 
Plant Availability (percent):
  
Fossil-steam 90.5 90.5 89.3 89.0 88.5  91.3 90.5 90.5 89.3 89.0 
Nuclear 91.3 90.8 91.5 90.5 92.8  90.1 91.3 90.8 91.5 90.5 
Source of Energy Supply (percent):
  
Coal 64.0 67.1 67.2 67.4 65.0  54.7 64.0 67.1 67.2 67.4 
Nuclear 14.0 13.4 14.0 14.0 14.5  14.9 14.0 13.4 14.0 14.0 
Hydro 1.4 0.9 1.9 3.1 2.9  3.9 1.4 0.9 1.9 3.1 
Oil and gas 15.4 15.0 12.9 10.9 10.9  22.5 15.4 15.0 12.9 10.9 
Purchased power 5.2 3.6 4.0 4.6 6.7  4.0 5.2 3.6 4.0 4.6 
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0  100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

II-107II-96


ALABAMA POWER COMPANY
FINANCIAL SECTION

II-108II-97


MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING

Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
The management of Alabama Power Company (the “Company”) is responsible for establishing and maintaining an adequate system of internal control over financial reporting as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). A control system can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.
Under management’s supervision, an evaluation of the design and effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was conducted based on the framework inInternal Control—Integrated Frameworkissued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this evaluation, management concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2008.2009.
This Annual Report does not include an attestation report of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation by the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit the Company to provide only management’s report in this Annual Report.
/s/ Charles D. McCrary

Charles D. McCrary
President and Chief Executive Officer
/s/ Art P. Beattie

Art P. Beattie
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer
February 25, 20092010

II-109II-98


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Alabama Power Company
We have audited the accompanying balance sheets and statements of capitalization of Alabama Power Company (the “Company”) (a wholly owned subsidiary of Southern Company) as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, and the related statements of income, comprehensive income, common stockholder’s equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008.2009. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such financial statements (pages II-133II-123 to II-169)II-166) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Alabama Power Company at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008,2009, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Birmingham, Alabama
February 25, 20092010

II-110II-99


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
OVERVIEW
Business Activities
Alabama Power Company (the Company) operates as a vertically integrated utility providing electricity to retail and wholesale customers within its traditional service area located withinin the State of Alabama andin addition to wholesale customers in the Southeast.
Many factors affect the opportunities, challenges, and risks of the Company’s primary business of selling electricity. These factors include the ability to maintain a constructive regulatory environment, to maintain energy sales ingiven the midsteffects of the current economic downturn,recession, and to effectively manage and secure timely recovery of rising costs. These costs include those related to projected long-term demand growth, increasingly stringent environmental standards, fuel, prices, capital expenditures, and restoration following major storms. Appropriately balancing the need to recover these increasing costs with customer prices will continue to challenge the Company for the foreseeable future.
Key Performance Indicators
In striving to maximize shareholder value while providing cost-effective energy to customers, the Company continues to focus on several key indicators. These indicators include customer satisfaction, plant availability, system reliability, and net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock. The Company’s financial success is directly tied to the satisfaction of its customers. Key elements of ensuring customer satisfaction include outstanding service, high reliability, and competitive prices. Management uses customer satisfaction surveys and reliability indicators to evaluate the Company’s results.
Peak season equivalent forced outage rate (Peak Season EFOR) is an indicator of fossil/hydro and nuclear plant availability and efficient generation fleet operations during the months when generation needs are greatest. The rate is calculated by dividing the number of hours of forced outages by total generation hours. The fossil/hydro 20082009 Peak Season EFOR of 1.51%1.50% was better than the target. The nuclear generating fleet also uses Peak Season EFOR as an indicator of availability and efficient generation fleet operations during the peak season. The nuclear 20082009 Peak Season EFOR of 2.78% did not meet0.14% was better than the target. Transmission and distribution system reliability performance is measured by the frequency and duration of outages. Performance targets for reliability are set internally based on historical performance, expected weather conditions, and expected capital expenditures. The performance for 20082009 was better than the target for these reliability measures.
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock is the primary componentmeasure of the Company’s contribution to Southern Company’s earnings per share goal.financial performance. The Company’s 20082009 results compared with its targets for some of these key indicators are reflected in the following chart.
        
 2008 2008 2009 2009
 Target Actual Target Actual
Key Performance Indicator Performance Performance Performance Performance
 Top quartile in   Top quartile in  
Customer Satisfaction
 customer surveys Top quartile customer surveys Top quartile
Peak Season EFOR — fossil/hydro
 2.75% or less 1.51% 2.75% or less 1.50%
Peak Season EFOR — nuclear
 2.00% or less 2.78% 2.75% or less 0.14%
Net Income
 $617 million $616 million $666 million $670 million
See RESULTS OF OPERATIONS herein for additional information on the Company’s financial performance. The financial performance achieved in 20082009 reflects the continued management emphasis, as well as the commitment shown by employees, in achieving or exceeding these key performance expectations.
Earnings
The Company’s financial performance remained strong in 20082009 despite the challenges of a weakeningrecessionary economy. The Company’s net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock of $670 million in 2009 increased $54 million (8.7%) over the prior year. The increase was primarily due to the corrective rate package providing for adjustments associated with customer charges to certain existing rate structures effective in January 2009, a decrease in other operations and maintenance expenses, and an increase in allowance for funds used during construction (AFUDC) equity. The increase was partially offset by an overall decline in base rate revenues attributable to a decline in kilowatt-hour (KWH) sales, resulting from a recessionary economy and rising costs. unfavorable weather conditions.

II-100


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The Company’s net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock of $616 million in 2008 increased $36 million (6.3%) over the prior year. This improvement was primarily due to an increase in retail base rate revenues resulting from an increase in rates under the Rate Stabilization and Equalization Plan (Rate RSE) and the Rate Certificated New Plant (Rate CNP) for environmental costs that took effect January 1, 2008, partially offset by higher non-fuel operating expenses and depreciation expense.

II-111


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
depreciation.
The Company’s 2007 net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock was $580 million, representing a $62 million (11.9%) increase from the prior year. This improvement was primarily due to an increase in retail base rate revenues resulting from an increase in rates under Rate RSE and Rate CNP for environmental costs that took effect January 1, 2007 as well as favorable weather conditions, partially offset by higher non-fuel operating expenses and increased interest expense.
The Company’s 2006 net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock was $518 million, representing a $10 million (1.9%) increase from the prior year. This improvement was primarily due to retail and wholesale revenue growth offset by higher non-fuel operating expenses and increased interest expense.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
A condensed income statement for the Company follows:
                                
 Increase (Decrease) Increase (Decrease)
 Amount from Prior Year Amount from Prior Year
 2008 2008 2007 2006 2009 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
Operating revenues $6,077 $717 $345 $367  $5,529 $(548) $717 $345 
Fuel 2,184 422 90 216  1,824  (360) 422 90 
Purchased power 538 99 12  (31) 307  (232) 99 12 
Other operations and maintenance 1,259 73 89 53  1,211  (48) 73 89 
Depreciation and amortization 520 49 21 24  545 25 49 21 
Taxes other than income taxes 307 20 28 9  322 16 20 28 
Total operating expenses 4,808 663 240 271  4,209  (599) 663 240 
Operating income 1,269 54 105 96  1,320 51 54 105 
Total other income and (expense)  (246) 2  (11)  (40)  (227) 19 2  (11)
Income taxes 368 16 21 46  384 16 16 21 
Net income 655 40 73 10  709 54 40 73 
Dividends on preferred and preference stock 39 4 11   39  4 11 
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock $616 $36 $62 $10  $670 $54 $36 $62 
Operating Revenues
Operating revenues for 20082009 were $6.1$5.5 billion, reflecting a $717$548 million increasedecrease from 2007.2008. The following table summarizes the principal factors that have affected operating revenues for the past three years:
             
  Amount
  2008 2007 2006
  (in millions)
Retail — prior year $4,407.0  $3,995.7  $3,621.4 
Estimated change in —            
Rates and pricing  246.1   216.3   48.4 
Sales growth  26.8   (4.9)  35.8 
Weather  (70.4)  37.6   19.9 
Fuel and other cost recovery  252.8   162.3   270.2 
 
Retail — current year  4,862.3   4,407.0   3,995.7 
 
Wholesale revenues —            
Non-affiliates  711.9   627.0   634.6 
Affiliates  308.5   144.1   216.0 
 
Total wholesale revenues  1,020.4   771.1   850.6 
 
Other operating revenues  194.2   181.9   168.4 
 
Total operating revenues $6,076.9  $5,360.0  $5,014.7 
 
Percent change  13.4%  6.9%  7.9%
 
Retail revenues in 2008 were $4.9 billion. These revenues increased $455 million (10.3%) in 2008, $411 million (10.3%) in 2007, and $374 million (10.3%) in 2006. These increases were primarily due to increased fuel revenue and base rate increases of 5.6% in
             
  Amount
  2009  2008  2007 
  (in millions)
Retail — prior year $4,862  $4,407  $3,996 
Estimated change in —            
Rates and pricing  174   246   216 
Sales growth (decline)  (109)  26   (5)
Weather  (12)  (70)  38 
Fuel and other cost recovery  (418)  253   162 
 
Retail — current year  4,497   4,862   4,407 
 
Wholesale revenues —            
Non-affiliates  620   712   627 
Affiliates  237   309   144 
 
Total wholesale revenues  857   1,021   771 
 
Other operating revenues  175   194   182 
 
Total operating revenues $5,529  $6,077  $5,360 
 
Percent change  (9)%  13%  7%
 

II-112II-101


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
JanuaryRetail revenues in 2009 were $4.5 billion. These revenues decreased $365 million (7.5%) in 2009 and increased $455 million (10.3%) and $411 million (10.3%) in 2008 5.3%and 2007, respectively. The decrease in January2009 was due to decreased fuel revenue and a decline in KWH sales, partially offset by the corrective rate package providing for adjustments associated with customer charges to certain existing rate structures. The increases in 2008 and 2007 were primarily due to increases in fuel revenue and 2.6% in January 2006.base rate increases of 5.6% and 5.3%, respectively. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “PSC Matters” herein and Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters” for additional information. See “Energy Sales” below for a discussion of changes in the volume of energy sold, including changes related to sales growth (decline) and weather.
Fuel rates billed to customers are designed to fully recover fluctuating fuel and purchased power costs over a period of time. Fuel revenues generally have no effect on net income because they represent the recording of revenues to offset fuel and purchased power expenses. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “PSC Matters — Retail Fuel Cost Recovery” herein and Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Fuel Cost Recovery” for additional information.
Wholesale revenues from sales to non-affiliated utilities were as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007 
 (in millions) (in millions)
Unit power sales —  
Capacity $160 $151 $154  $158 $160 $151 
Energy 238 192 198  207 238 192 
Total 398 343 352  365 398 343 
Other power sales —  
Capacity and other 134 128 137  133 134 128 
Energy 180 156 146  122 180 156 
Total 314 284 283  255 314 284 
Total non-affiliated $712 $627 $635  $620 $712 $627 
Wholesale revenues from sales to non-affiliates will vary depending on the market cost of available energy compared to the cost of the Company and Southern Company system-owned generation, demand for energy within the Southern Company service territory, and availability of Southern Company system generation.
Wholesale revenues from sales to non-affiliates include unit power sales under long-term contracts to Florida utilities and sales to wholesale customers within the Company’s service territory. Capacity revenues under unit power sales contracts reflect the recovery of fixed costs and a return on investment, and under these contracts, energy is generally sold at variable cost. Fluctuations in the prices of oil and natural gas, prices, which are the primary fuel sources for unit power sales customers, influence changes in these energy sales. However, because energy is generally sold at variable cost, these fluctuations have a minimal effect on earnings. No significant declines in the amountThe amounts of long-term unit power sales capacity revenues are scheduled untilto cease with the termination of the unit power sales contractscontract in May 2010. In June 2010, the unitscapacity subject to the unit power sales contracts are expected to return to territorialwill be utilized for retail service. As shown in the table above, unit power sales capacity revenues have ranged from $151 million to $160 million over the last three years. Short-term opportunity energy sales are also included in wholesale energy sales to non-affiliates. These opportunity sales are made at market-based rates that generally provide a margin above the Company’s variable cost to produce the energy. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “PSC Matters — Retail Rate Adjustments” herein and Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Rate RSE” for additional information.
Wholesale revenues from sales to affiliated companies within the Southern Company system will vary from year to year depending on demand and the availability and cost of generating resources at each company. These affiliated sales and purchases are made in accordance with the Intercompany Interchange Contract (IIC), as approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). In 2009, wholesale revenues from sales to affiliates decreased $71.5 million primarily due to a 37.6% decrease in price, partially offset by a 23.2% increase in KWH sales to affiliates as a result of greater availability of the Company’s generating resources because of a decrease in customer demand within the Company’s service territory. In 2008, wholesale revenues from sales to affiliates increased $164.4 million primarily due to a 62.2% increase in kilowatt-hour (KWH)KWH sales to affiliates as a result of an increase in thegreater availability of the Company’s generating resources because of a decrease in customer demand within the Company’s service territory. In 2007, wholesale revenues from sales to affiliates decreased $71.9 million primarily due to a 37.0% decrease in KWH sales to affiliates as a result of a decrease in thelower availability of the Company’s generating resources because of an increase in customer demand within the Company’s service territory. In 2006, wholesale revenues decreased $73.0 million primarily due to a 16.7% decrease in price and a 10.3% decrease in KWH sales to affiliates as a result of a decrease in the availability of the Company’s generating resources because of an increase in customer demand within the Company’s service territory. Excluding the capacity revenues, these

II-102


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
These transactions do not have a significant impact on earnings since the energy is generally sold at marginal cost and energy purchases are generally offset by energy revenues through the Company’s energy cost recovery clause (Rate ECR).clauses.
Other operating revenues in 2009 decreased $19.6 million (10.1%) from 2008 primarily due to a $42.5 million decrease in revenues from gas-fueled co-generation steam facilities as a result of lower gas prices. This decrease was partially offset by an increase of $10.0 million in customer charges related to late fees. In 2008, other operating revenues increased $12.4 million (6.8%) from 2007 primarily due to an $11.7 million increase in revenues from gas-fueled co-generation steam facilities. In 2007, other operating revenues increased $13.5 million (8.0%) from 2006 primarily due to a $4.0 million increase in revenues from electric property associated with pole attachment and building rentals, a $2.6 million increase in transmission revenues, and a $2.5 million increase in revenues from gas-fueled co-generation steam facilities. In 2006,

II-113


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
other operating revenues decreased $17.6 million (9.5%) from 2005 primarily due to a decrease of $14.6 million in revenues from gas-fueled co-generation steam facilities mainly as a result of lower gas prices. Since co-generation steam revenues are generally offset by fuel expense, these revenues did not have a significant impact on earnings for any year reported.
Energy Sales
Changes in revenues are influenced heavily by the change in the volume of energy sold from year to year. KWH sales for 20082009 and the percent change by year were as follows:
                                
 KWHs Percent Change KWHs Percent Change
 2008 2008 2007 2006 2009 2009 2008 2007
 (in billions)  (in billions) 
Residential 18.4  (2.6)%  1.3%  3.1% 18.1  (1.7)%  (2.6)%  1.3%
Commercial 14.5  (1.4) 2.8 2.1  14.2  (2.5)  (1.4) 2.8 
Industrial 22.1  (3.2)  (1.6)  (0.7) 18.5  (15.9)  (3.2)  (1.6)
Other 0.2 0.2 0.7 0.4  0.2 8.1 0.2 0.7 
Total retail 55.2  (2.5) 0.5 1.2  51.0  (7.6)  (2.5) 0.5 
Wholesale —  
Non-affiliates 15.2  (3.6)  (1.3) 3.5  14.3  (5.8)  (3.6)  (1.3)
Affiliates 5.3 62.2  (37.0)  (10.3) 6.5 23.2 62.2  (37.0)
Total wholesale 20.5 7.6  (10.0)  (0.3) 20.8 1.6 7.6  (10.0)
Total energy sales 75.7 0.0  (2.4) 0.8  71.8  (5.1) 0.0  (2.4)
Changes in retail energy sales are comprised of changes in electricity usage by customers, changes in weather, and changes in the number of customers. Retail energy sales in 2009 were 7.6% less than in 2008. Energy sales were down in 2009 across major classes of customers. Residential and commercial sales decreased 1.7% and 2.5%, respectively, due primarily to unfavorable weather and decreased customer demand in 2009 as compared to 2008. Industrial sales decreased 15.9% during the year as a result of decreased customer demand in all sectors, most significantly in the chemical and primary metals sectors, due to a recessionary economy.
Retail energy sales in 2008 were 2.5% less than in 2007. Energy sales were down in 2008 across allmajor classes of customers. Residential and commercial sales decreased 2.6% and 1.4%, respectively, due primarily to milderunfavorable weather in 2008 compared to 2007. Industrial sales decreased 3.2% during the year primarily as a result of decreased customer demand in the chemical and pipeline, and textiles and food sectors, as a result of a slowing economy that worsened during the fourth quarter of 2008.
Retail energy sales in 2007 were 0.5% higher than in 2006. Energy sales in the residential and commercial sectors led the growth with a 1.3% and a 2.8% increase, respectively, due primarily to weather-driven increased demand. Industrial sales decreased 1.6% during the year primarily as a result of decreased sales demand in textiles and food, primary metals, and chemical sectors.
Retail energy sales in 2006 were 1.2% higher than in 2005. Energy sales in the residential and commercial sectors led the growth with a 3.1% and a 2.1% increase, respectively, due primarily to weather-driven increased demand. Industrial sales decreased 0.7% as several large textile facilities discontinued or substantially reduced their operations in 2006. In addition, industrial sales decreased due to pulp and paper customers utilizing self-generation as a result of lower gas prices during the year compared to 2005.
Fuel and Purchased Power Expenses
Fuel costs constitute the single largest expense for the Company. The mix of fuel sources for generation of electricity is determined primarily by demand, the unit cost of fuel consumed, and the availability of generating units. Additionally, the Company purchases a portion of its electricity needs from the wholesale market. Details of the Company’s electricity generated and purchased were as follows:
             
  2008 2007 2006
 
Total generation(billions of KWHs)
  70.0   69.8   72.0 
Total purchased power(billions of KWHs)
  9.2   9.6   8.9 
 
Sources of generation(percent)—
            
Coal  66   69   68 
Nuclear  20   19   19 
Gas  11   10   9 
Hydro  3   2   4 
 
Cost of fuel, generated(cents per net KWH)—
            
Coal  2.94   2.14   2.09 
Nuclear  0.50   0.50   0.47 
Gas  8.30   7.43   7.87 
 
Average cost of fuel, generated(cents per net KWH)
  3.00   2.36   2.27 
Average cost of purchased power(cents per net KWH)
  7.44   6.07   5.98 
 

II-114II-103


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Details of the Company’s electricity generated and purchased were as follows:
             
  2009  2008  2007 
 
Total generation(billions of KWHs)
  68.8   70.0   69.8 
Total purchased power(billions of KWHs)
  6.3   9.2   9.6 
 
Sources of generation(percent) —
            
Coal  58   66   69 
Nuclear  20   20   19 
Gas  13   11   10 
Hydro  9   3   2 
 
Cost of fuel, generated(cents per net KWH) —
            
Coal  3.02   2.94   2.14 
Nuclear  0.56   0.50   0.50 
Gas  5.24   8.30   7.43 
 
Average cost of fuel, generated(cents per net KWH)*
  2.79   3.00   2.36 
Average cost of purchased power(cents per net KWH)
  6.05   7.44   6.07 
 
*Fuel includes fuel purchased by the Company for tolling agreements where power is generated by the provider and is included in purchased power when determining the average cost of purchased power.
Fuel and purchased power expenses were $2.1 billion in 2009, a decrease of $592.1 million (21.8%) below the prior year costs. This decrease was the result of a $367.3 million decrease related to the volume of KWHs generated and purchased and a $224.8 million decrease in the cost of fuel resulting from lower natural gas prices and an increase in hydro generation.
Fuel and purchased power expenses were $2.7 billion in 2008, an increase of $521.5 million (23.7%) above the prior year costs. This increase was the result of a $560.8 million increase in the cost of fuel, offset by a $39.3 million decrease related to the volume of KWHs generated and purchased.
Fuel and purchased power expenses were $2.2 billion in 2007, an increase of $101.9 million (4.9%) above the prior year costs. This increase was the result of a $70.3 million increase in the cost of fuel and a $31.6 million increase related to the volume of KWHs generated and purchased.
Fuel and purchased power expenses were $2.1 billion in 2006, an increase of $184.1 million (9.6%) above the prior year costs. This increase was the result of a $128.7 million increase in the cost of fuel and a $55.4 million increase related to the volume of KWHs generated and purchased.
Purchased power consists of purchases from affiliates in the Southern Company system and non-affiliated companies. Purchased power transactions among the Company, its affiliates, and non-affiliates will vary from period to period depending on demand and the availability and variable production cost of generating resources at each company. PurchasedIn 2009, purchased power from non-affiliates decreased $91.1 million (50.9%) due to a 34.9% decrease in the amount of energy purchased and a 24.6% decrease in the average cost per KWH. In 2009, purchased power from affiliates decreased $140.5 million (39.1%) due to a 31.4% decrease in the amount of energy purchased. In 2008, the average cost of purchased power from non-affiliates increased $81.9 million (84.5%) in 2008 due to a 67.9% increase in the amount of energy purchased. In 2007, purchased power from non-affiliates decreased $27.1 million (21.8%) due to a 22.6% decrease in the amount of energy purchased over the previous year. In 2006, purchased power from non-affiliates decreased $64.7 million (34.3%) duepurchased.
Coal prices continued to a 26.8% decrease in the amount of energy purchased and a 10.3% decrease in purchased power prices over the previous year.
Over the last several years, coal prices have beenbe influenced by a worldwide increase in demand from developing countries, as well as increases inincreased mining and fuel transportation costs. In the first half of 2008,While coal prices reached unprecedented high levels primarily due to increased demand following more moderate pricing in 20062008, the recessionary economy pushed prices downward in 2009. However, the lower prices did not fully offset the higher priced coal already in inventory and 2007. Despite these fluctuations, fuel inventories have been adequate and fuel supply markets have been sufficient to meet expected fuel requirements.under long-term contract. Demand for natural gas in the United States also increased in 2007 andwas affected by the first half of 2008. However,recessionary economy leading to significantly lower natural gas supplies increased in the last half of 2008 as a result of increased production and higher storage levels due in part to weak industrial demand. Both coal and natural gas prices moderated in the second half of 2008 as the result of a recessionary economy.prices. During 2008,2009, uranium prices continued to moderate from the highs set during 2007. While worldwide uraniumWorldwide production levels appear to have increased slightly since 2007,in 2009; however, secondary supplies and inventories were still required to meet worldwide reactor demand.
Fuel and purchased power expenses generally do not affect net income, since they are offset by fuel revenues under the Company’s Rate ECR.energy cost recovery rate (Rate ECR). The Company, along with the Alabama Public Service Commission (PSC), continuously monitors the under/over recovered balance to determine whether adjustments to billing rates are required. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “PSC Matters — Retail Fuel Cost Recovery” herein and Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Fuel Cost Recovery” for additional information.

II-104


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Other Operations and Maintenance Expenses
In 2009, other operations and maintenance expenses decreased $47.6 million (3.8%) primarily due to an $18.1 million decrease in steam production expense related to fewer scheduled outages, a $12.9 million decrease in administrative and general expense related to reductions in employee medical and other benefit-related expenses and in the injuries and damages reserve, a $5.5 million decrease in customer accounts expense, and a $4.7 million decrease in customer service and information expense.
In 2008, other operations and maintenance expenses increased $72.7 million (6.1%) primarily due to a $27.4 million increase in steam production expense related to environmental mandates (which were offset by revenues associated with Rate CNP environmental) and scheduled outage costs, a $22.9 million increase in nuclear production expense related to operations and scheduled outage costs, and a $19.9 million increase in transmission and distribution expense related to overhead line clearing costs.
In 2007, other operations and maintenance expenses increased $89.3 million (8.1%) primarily due to a $28.5 million increase in steam production expense related to environmental mandates and scheduled outage costs, a $19.6 million increase in transmission and distribution expense related to overhead line clearing costs, a $19.0 million increase in administrative and general expenses related to an increase in the expenses for the injuries and damages reserve, outside services, and employee benefits, an $8.1 million increase in nuclear production expense related to scheduled outage cost, and a $4.7 million increase in customer accounts expense associated with customer service expenses. In 2006, other operations and maintenance expenses increased $52.8 million (5.1%) primarily due to an $18.8 million increase in administrative and general expenses related to employee benefits, a $10.1 million increase in nuclear production expense related to both routine operation and scheduled outage costs, a $9.8 million increase in transmission and distribution expense related to overhead and underground line costs, and a $5.4 million increase in steam production expense related to environmental costs.

II-115


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation and amortization expenses increased $24.5 million (4.7%) in 2009, $48.9 million (10.4%) in 2008, and $20.5 million (4.5%) in 2007, and $24.5 million (5.7%) in 2006, primarily due to additions to property, plant, and equipment related to environmental mandates (which were offset by revenues associated with Rate CNP environmental) and transmission and distribution projects. DuringSee Note 3 to financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Rate CNP” for additional information.
On June 25, 2009, the Company submitted an offer of settlement and stipulation to the FERC relating to the 2008 a depreciation study was completed based on information as of December 31, 2007. The studythat was filed within October 2008. The settlement offer withdraws the requests for authorization to use updated depreciation rates. In lieu of the new rates, the Company is using those depreciation rates employed prior and up to January 1, 2009 that were previously approved by the FERC. On September 30, 2009, the FERC on October 29, 2008issued an order approving the settlement offer. See Note 1 to financial statements under “Depreciation and was also provided to the Alabama PSC. The proposed rates result in an expected increase in depreciation expenseAmortization” for 2009 of approximately $29 million.additional information.
Taxes Other Than Income Taxes
Taxes other than income taxes increased $15.8 million (5.1%) in 2009, $19.9 million (7.0%) in 2008, and $28.4 million (11.0%) in 2007, and $9.3 million (3.7%) in 2006, primarily due to increases in the bases of state and municipal public utility license taxes which are directly related to the increase in retail revenues.taxes.
Allowance for Equity Funds Used During Construction Equity
Allowance forAFUDC equity funds used during construction (AFUDC) increased $33.7 million (73.9%) in 2009, $10.1 million (28.5%) in 2008, and $17.2 million (94.1%) in 2007, primarily due to increases in the amount of construction work in progress related to environmental mandates at generating facilities, as well as transmission, distribution, and transmission and distributiongeneral plant projects compared to the prior years. In 2006, AFUDC decreased $2.0 million (10.0%) primarily due to the timing of construction expenditures compared to the prior year. See Note 1 to the financial statements under “Allowance for Funds Used During Construction (AFUDC)”Construction” for additional information.
Interest Expense, Net of Amounts Capitalized
Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized, increased $19.6 million (7.0%) in 2009 primarily due to the issuance of long-term debt, partially offset by additional capitalized interest, as a result of increases in construction work in progress. Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized, increased $5.2 million (1.9%) in 2008 which was not material when compared to the prior year. Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized, increased $21.5 million (8.5%) in 2007 primarily due to higher interest rates on new issuance of long-term debt and higher interest rates on the Company’s outstanding variable rate securities.

II-105


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Income Taxes
Income taxes increased $16.2 million (4.4%) in 2009, primarily due to higher pre-tax income, prior year tax return actualization, and an increase in expense related to normal tax contingencies, partially offset by the tax benefits associated with an increase in AFUDC equity and an increase in the federal production activities deduction.
Income taxes increased $16.6 million (4.7%) in 2008, primarily due to higher pre-tax income partially offset by the tax benefit associated with an increase in AFUDC equity and a decrease in expense related to normal tax contingencies.
Income taxes increased $20.9 million (6.3%) in 2007, primarily due to higher pre-tax income partially offset by the tax benefit associated with an increase in AFUDC equity and an increase in the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Internal Revenue Code), Section 199federal production activities deduction.
Income taxes increased $45.6 million (16.0%) in 2006, primarily due to higher pre-tax income and the impact of a 2005 accounting order approved by the Alabama PSC to return certain regulatory liabilities related to deferred taxes to Alabama Power’s retail customers. See Note 5 to the financial statements for additional information.
Effects of Inflation
The Company is subject to rate regulation that is generally based on the recovery of historical and projected costs. Retail rates may be adjusted annually based on historical or projected costs, including estimates for inflation. When historical costs are included, or when inflation exceeds the projected costs used in rate regulation or market-based prices, theThe effects of inflation can create an economic loss since the recovery of costs could be in dollars that have less purchasing power. In addition, the income tax laws are based on historical costs. Any adverse effect of inflation on the Company’s results of operations has not been substantial. See Note 3 to financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Rate RSE” for additional information.
FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL
General
The Company operates as a vertically integrated utility providing electricity to retail and wholesale customers within its traditional service area located in the State of Alabama in addition to wholesale customers in the Southeast. Prices for electricity provided by the Company to retail customers are set by the Alabama PSC under cost-based regulatory principles. Prices for wholesale electricity sales, interconnecting transmission lines, and the exchange of electric power are regulated by the FERC. Retail rates and earnings are reviewed and may be adjusted periodically within certain limitations. See ACCOUNTING POLICIES — “Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates — Electric Utility Regulation” herein and Note 3 to the financial statements under “FERC Matters” and “Retail Regulatory Matters” for additional information about regulatory matters.

II-116


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The results of operations for the past three years are not necessarily indicative of future earnings potential. The level of the Company’s future earnings depends on numerous factors that affect the opportunities, challenges, and risks of the Company’s primary business of selling electricity. These factors include the Company’s ability to maintain a constructive regulatory environment that continues to allow for the recovery of all prudently incurred costs during a time of increasing costs. Future earnings in the near term will depend, in part, upon maintaining energy sales, during the current economic downturn, which is subject to a number of factors. These factors include weather, competition, new energy contracts with neighboring utilities, energy conservation practiced by customers, the price of electricity, the price elasticity of demand, and the rate of economic growth or decline in the Company’s service area. Recent recessionaryRecessionary conditions have negatively impacted sales growth.and are expected to continue to have a negative impact, particularly on industrial and commercial customers. The timing and extent of the economic recovery will impact future earnings.
Environmental Matters
Compliance costs related to the Clean Air Act and other environmental statutes and regulations could affect earnings if such costs cannot continue to be fully recovered in rates on a timely basis. Environmental compliance spending over the next several years may exceed amounts estimated. Some of the factors driving the potential for such an increase are higher commodity costs, market demand for labor, and scope additions and clarifications. The timing, specific requirements, and estimated costs could also change as environmental statutes and regulations are adopted or modified. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Environmental Matters” for additional information.
New Source Review Actions
In November 1999, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) brought a civil action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, including the Company, alleging that itthese subsidiaries had violated the New Source Review (NSR) provisions of the Clean Air Act and related state laws at certain coal-fired generating facilities. Through subsequent amendments and other legal procedures,These actions were filed concurrently with the issuance of notices of violation of the NSR provisions to each of the

II-106


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
traditional operating companies. After the Company was dismissed from the original action, the EPA filed a separate action in January 2001 against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama afterAlabama. In the lawsuit against the Company, was dismissed from the original action. In this lawsuit, the EPA allegedalleges that NSR violations occurred at five coal-fired generating facilities operated by the Company. The civil action requests penalties and injunctive relief, including an order requiring the installation of the best available control technology at the affected units. The original action, now solely against Georgia Power, has been administratively closed since the spring of 2001, and the case has not been reopened.
In June 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama entered a consent decree between the Company and the EPA, resolving a portion of the Company’s lawsuit relating to the alleged NSR violations at Plant Miller. The consent decree required the Company to pay $100,000 to resolve the government’s claim for a civil penalty and to donate $4.9 million of sulfur dioxide emission allowances to a nonprofit charitable organization. It also formalized specific emissions reductions to be accomplished by the Company, consistent with other Clean Air Act programs that require emissions reductions. In August 2006, the district court in Alabama granted the Company’s motion for summary judgment and entered final judgment in favor of the Company on the EPA’s claims related to all of the remaining plants: Plants Barry, Gaston, Gorgas, and Greene County.
The plaintiffs appealed the district court’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, where the appeal was stayed, pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in a similar case against Duke Energy. The Supreme Court issued its decision in the Duke Energy case in April 2007, and in December 2007, the Eleventh Circuit vacated the district court’s decision in the Company’s case and remanded the case back to the district court for consideration of the legal issues in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Duke Energy case. On July 24, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama granted partial summary judgment in favor of the Company with respect to its other affected units regarding the proper legal test for determining whether projects are routine maintenance, repair, and replacement and therefore are excluded from NSR permitting. The decision did not resolve the case, and the ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.which remains ongoing.
The Company believes that it complied with applicable laws and the EPA regulations and interpretations in effect at the time the work in question took place. The Clean Air Act authorizes maximum civil penalties of $25,000 to $37,500 per day, per violation at each generating unit, depending on the date of the alleged violation. An adverse outcome in this matter could require substantial capital expenditures or affect the timing of currently budgeted capital expenditures that cannot be determined at this time and could possibly require payment of substantial penalties. Such expenditures could affect future results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.

II-117


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Carbon Dioxide Litigation
New York Case
In July 2004, three environmental groups and attorneys general from eight states, each outside of Southern Company’s service territory, and the corporation counsel for New York City filed complaints in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against Southern Company and four other electric power companies. The complaints allege that the companies’ emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, contribute to global warming, which the plaintiffs assert is a public nuisance. Under common law public and private nuisance theories, the plaintiffs seek a judicial order (1) holding each defendant jointly and severally liable for creating, contributing to, and/or maintaining global warming and (2) requiring each of the defendants to cap its emissions of carbon dioxide and then reduce those emissions by a specified percentage each year for at least a decade. The plaintiffs have not, however, requested that damages be awarded in connection with their claims. Southern Company believes these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. In September 2005, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted Southern Company’s and the other defendants’ motions to dismiss these cases. The plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in October 2005 but no decision has been issued. Theand, on September 21, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the district court’s ruling, vacating the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claim, and remanding the case to the district court. On November 5, 2009, the defendants, including Southern Company, sought rehearing en banc, and the court’s ruling is subject to potential appeal. Therefore, the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Kivalina Case
OnIn February 26, 2008, the Native Village of Kivalina and the City of Kivalina filed a suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against several electric utilities (including Southern Company), several oil companies, and a coal company. The plaintiffs are the governing bodies of an Inupiat village in Alaska. The plaintiffs contend that the village is being destroyed by erosion allegedly caused by global warming that the plaintiffs attribute to emissions of greenhouse gases by the defendants. The plaintiffs assert claims for public and private nuisance and contend that some of the defendants have acted in concert and are therefore jointly and severally liable for the plaintiffs’ damages. The suit seeks damages for lost property values and for the cost of relocating the village, which is alleged to be $95 million to $400 million. On June 30, 2008, all defendants filed motions to dismiss this case. Southern Company believes that these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. On September 30, 2009, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss the case based on lack of jurisdiction and ruled the claims were barred by the political question doctrine and by the plaintiffs’ failure to establish the standard for determining that the defendants’ conduct caused the injury alleged. On November 5, 2009, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit challenging the district court’s order dismissing the case. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.

II-107


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Other Litigation
Common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas emissions have become more frequent, and courts have recently determined that private parties and states have standing to bring such claims. For example, on October 16, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi’s dismissal of private party claims against certain oil, coal, chemical, and utility companies alleging damages as a result of Hurricane Katrina. In reversing the dismissal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that plaintiffs have standing to assert their nuisance, trespass, and negligence claims and none of these claims are barred by the political question doctrine. The Company is not currently a party to this litigation but was named as a defendant in an amended complaint which was rendered moot in August 2007 by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi when such court dismissed the original matter. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Environmental Statutes and Regulations
General
The Company’s operations are subject to extensive regulation by state and federal environmental agencies under a variety of statutes and regulations governing environmental media, including air, water, and land resources. Applicable statutes include the Clean Air Act; the Clean Water Act; the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; the Toxic Substances Control Act; the Emergency Planning & Community Right-to-Know Act; the Endangered Species Act; and related federal and state regulations. Compliance with these environmental requirements involves significant capital and operating costs, a major portion of which is expected to be recovered through existing ratemaking provisions. Through 2008,2009, the Company had invested approximately $2.3$2.8 billion in capital projects to comply with these requirements, with annual totals of $526 million, $617 million, and $469 million for 2009, 2008, and $260 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. The Company expects that capital expenditures to assure compliance with existing and new statutes and regulations will be an additional $584$136 million, $131$85 million, and $59$99 million for 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2011,2012, respectively. The Company’s compliance strategy can be affected by changes to existing environmental laws, statutes, and regulations,regulations; the cost, availability, and existing inventory of emission allowances,emissions allowances; and the Company’s fuel mix. Environmental costs that are known and estimable at this time are included in capital expenditures discussed under FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY — “Capital Requirements and Contractual Obligations” herein.
Compliance with any new federal or state legislation or regulations related to global climate change, air quality, coal combustion byproducts, including coal ash, or other environmental and health concerns could also significantly affect the Company. Although new or revised environmental legislation or regulations could affect many areas of the Company’s operations, the full impact of any such changes cannot be determined at this time.
Air Quality
Compliance with the Clean Air Act and resulting regulations has been and will continue to be a significant focus for the Company. Through 2008,2009, the Company had spent approximately $2.0$2.5 billion in reducing sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxide (NOx)

II-118


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
emissions and in monitoring emissions pursuant to the Clean Air Act. Additional controls are currently being installed at several plants to further reduce air emissions, maintain compliance with existing regulations, and meet new requirements.
In 2004, theThe EPA designated nonattainment areas underregulates ground level ozone through implementation of an eight-hour ozone air quality standard. The BirminghamNo area was originallywithin the Company’s service area is currently designated as nonattainment under the eight-hour ozone standard, but has since been redesignated as an attainment area by the EPA, and a maintenance plan to address future exceedances of the standard has been approved. Oncurrent standard. In March 12, 2008, however, the EPA issued a final rule establishing a more stringent eight-hour ozone standard, which will likelyand on January 6, 2010, the EPA proposed further reductions in the standard. The EPA is expected to finalize the revised standard in August 2010 and require state implementation plans for any nonattainment areas by December 2013. The revised eight-hour ozone standard is expected to result in designation of new nonattainment areas within the Company’s service territory. The EPA is expected to publish those designations in 2010, and require state implementation plans for any nonattainment areas by 2013.
During 2005, the EPA’s annual fine particulate matter nonattainment designations became effective for several areas within the Company’s service territory, including the Birmingham area. State plans for addressing the nonattainment designations for this standard were due by April 5, 2008 but have not been finalized. These state plans could require further reductions in SO2 and NOx emissions from power plants. In September 2006, the EPA published a final rule which increased the stringency of the 24-hour average fine particulate matter air quality standard. On December 18, 2008, the EPAThe Birmingham, Alabama area has been designated the Birmingham area as nonattainment for the 24-hour standard. Astandard, and a state implementation plan for this nonattainment area is due in December 2012.

II-108


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
On December 8, 2009, the EPA also proposed revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for SO2. The EPA issuedis expected to finalize the final Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) in March 2005. This cap-and-trade rule addresses power plantrevised SO2 and NOx emissions that were found to contribute to nonattainment of the eight-hour ozone and fine particulate matter standardsstandard in downwind states. June 2010.
Twenty-eight eastern states, including the State of Alabama, are subject to the requirements of the rule.Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). The rule calls for additional reductions of NOx and/or SO2 to be achieved in two phases, 2009/2010 and 2015. OnIn July 11, 2008 in response to petitions brought by certain states and regulated industries challenging particular aspects of CAIR,December 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a decision vacatingdecisions invalidating certain aspects of CAIR, in its entirety and remanding it to the EPA for further action consistent with its opinion. On December 23, 2008, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit altered its July decision in response to a rehearing petition and remanded CAIR to the EPA without vacatur, thereby leavingbut left CAIR compliance requirements in place while the EPA develops a revised rule. The State of Alabama has completed its plan to implement CAIR. EmissionCAIR, and emissions reductions are being accomplished by the installation of emissionemissions controls at the Company’s coal-fired facilities and/or by the purchase of emissionemissions allowances. The full impact of the court’s remand and the outcome of the EPA’s future rulemakingEPA is expected to issue a proposed CAIR replacement rule in response cannot be determined at this time.July 2010.
The Clean Air Visibility Rule (formerly called the Regional Haze Rule) was finalized in July 2005. The2005, with a goal of this rule is to restorerestoring natural visibility conditions in certain areas (primarily national parks and wilderness areas) by 2064. The rule involves (1) the application of Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) to certain sources built between 1962 and 1977, and (2) the application of any additional emissions reductions which may be deemed necessary for each designated area to achieve reasonable progress by 2018 toward the natural conditions goal. Thereafter,goal by 2018 and for each 10-year planningten-year period additional emissions reductions will be required to continue to demonstrate reasonable progress in each area during that period.thereafter. For power plants, the Clean Air Visibility Rule allows states to determine that the CAIR satisfies BART requirements for SO2 and NOx. Extensive studies were performed for each of the Company’s affected units to demonstrate that additional particulate matter controls are not necessary under BART. The state of Alabama has determined that no additional SO2 controls beyond CAIR are neededanticipated to satisfy reasonable progress. States havebe necessary at any of the Company’s facilities. The State of Alabama has completed or are currently completingits implementation plans that contain strategies for BART compliance and any other measures required to achieve the first phase of reasonable progress.
The EPA is currently developing a Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) rule for coal and oil-fired electric generating units, which will likely address numerous Hazardous Air Pollutants, including mercury. In March 2005, the EPA issued the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), a cap and trade program for the reduction of mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants. In February 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the CAMR. In a separate proceeding in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the EPA entered into a proposed consent decree that requires the EPA to issue a proposed MACT rule by March 16, 2011 and a final rule by November 16, 2011.
The impacts of the eight-hour ozone nonattainment designations,standards, the fine particulate matter nonattainment designations, and future revisions to CAIR, the SO2 standard, the Clean Air Visibility Rule, and MACT rule for the electric generating units on the Company cannot be determined at this time and will depend on the specific provisions of the final rules, resolution of any pending legal challenges, and the development and implementation of rules at the state level. However, these additional regulations could result in significant additional compliance costs that could affect future unit retirement and replacement decisions and results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.
The Company has developed and continually updates a comprehensive environmental compliance strategy to assess compliance obligations associated with the continuing and new environmental requirements discussed above. As part of this strategy, the Company has already installed a number of SO2 and NOx emissions controls and plans to install additional SO2and NOx emission controls within the next several years to ensure continued compliance with applicable air quality requirements.
In March 2005, the EPA published the final Clean Air Mercury Rule, a cap-and-trade program for the reduction of mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants. The final Clean Air Mercury Rule was challenged in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The petitioners alleged that the EPA was not authorized to establish a cap-and-trade program for mercury emissions and instead the EPA must establish maximum achievable control technology standards for coal-fired electric utility steam generating units. On February 8, 2008, the court ruled in favor of the petitioners and vacated the Clean Air Mercury Rule. The

II-119


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Company’s overall environmental compliance strategy relies primarily on a combination of SO2 and NOx controls to reduce mercury emissions. Any significant changes in the strategy will depend on the outcome of any appeals and/or future federal and state rulemakings. Future rulemakings necessitated by the court’s decision could require emission reductions more stringent than those required by the Clean Air Mercury Rule.
Water Quality
In July 2004, the EPA published its final technology-based regulations under the Clean Water Act for the purpose of reducingto reduce impingement and entrainment of fish, shellfish, and other forms of aquatic life at existing power plant cooling water intake structures. The rules require baseline biological information and, perhaps, installation of fish protection technology near some intake structures at existing power plants. In January 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit overturned and remanded several provisions of the rule, including the use of cost-benefit analysis toin the EPA for revisions. The decision has beenrule was ultimately appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. On April 1, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the EPA could consider costs in arriving at its standards and in providing variances from those standards for existing intake structures. The EPA is now in the process of revising the regulations. While the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision may ultimately result in greater flexibility for demonstrating compliance with the standards, the full impactscope of thesethe regulations will depend on subsequent legal proceedings, further rulemaking by the EPA the results of studies and analyses performed as part of the rules’ implementation, and the actual requirements established by state regulatory agencies and, therefore, cannot be determined at this time.
On December 28, 2009, the EPA announced its determination that revision of the current effluent guidelines for steam electric power plants is warranted and proposed a plan to adopt such revisions by 2013. New wastewater treatment requirements are expected and may result in the installation of additional controls on certain Company facilities. The impact of revised guidelines will depend on the studies conducted in connection with the rulemaking, as well as the specific requirements of the final rule, and, therefore, cannot be determined at this time.

II-109


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Environmental Remediation
The Company must comply with other environmental laws and regulations that cover the handling and disposal of waste and releases of hazardous substances. Under these various laws and regulations, the Company could incur substantial costs to clean up properties. The Company conducts studies to determine the extent of any required cleanup and has recognized in its financial statements the costs to clean up known sites. Amounts for cleanup and ongoing monitoring costs were not material for any year presented. The Company may be liable for some or all required cleanup costs for additional sites that may require environmental remediation. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Environmental Matters — Environmental Remediation” for additional information.
Global Climate IssuesCoal Combustion Byproducts
Federal legislative proposals that would impose mandatory requirements relatedThe EPA is currently evaluating whether additional regulation of coal combustion byproducts is merited under federal solid and hazardous waste laws. The EPA has collected information from the electric utility industry on surface impoundment safety, and conducted on-site inspections at one of the Company’s facilities as part of its evaluation. The Company has a routine and robust inspection program in place to greenhouse gas emissions and renewable energy standards continueensure the integrity of its coal ash surface impoundments. The EPA is expected to be strongly consideredissue a proposal regarding additional regulation of coal combustion byproducts in Congress, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has been identified as a high priority by the current Administration.early 2010. The ultimate outcomeimpact of these proposalsadditional regulations on the Company will depend on the specific provisions of the final rule and cannot be determined at this time; however, mandatory restrictionstime. However, additional regulation of coal combustion byproducts could have a significant impact on the Company’s greenhouse gas emissionsmanagement, beneficial use, and disposal of such byproducts and could result in significant additional compliance costs that could affect future unit retirement and replacement decisions and results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.
Global Climate Issues
Federal legislative proposals that would impose mandatory requirements related to greenhouse gas emissions, renewable energy standards, and energy efficiency standards continue to be considered in Congress, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has been identified as a high priority by the current Administration. On June 26, 2009, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES), which would impose mandatory greenhouse gas restrictions through implementation of a cap and trade program, a renewable energy standard, and other measures, was passed by the House of Representatives. ACES would require reductions of greenhouse gas emissions on a national basis to a level that is 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, 42% below 2005 levels by 2030, and 83% below 2005 levels by 2050. In addition, ACES would provide for renewable energy standards of 6% by 2012 and 20% by 2020. Similar legislation is being considered by the Senate. The financial and operational impact of such legislation, if enacted, will depend on a variety of factors. These factors include the specific greenhouse gas emissions limits or renewable energy requirements, the timing of implementation of these limits or requirements, the level of emissions allowances allocated and the level that must be purchased, the purchase price of emissions allowances, the development and commercial availability of technologies for renewable energy and for the reduction of emissions, the degree to which offsets may be used for compliance, provisions for cost containment (if any), the impact on coal and natural gas prices, and cost recovery through regulated rates. There can be no assurance that any legislation will be enacted or as to the ultimate form of any legislation. Additional or alternative legislation may be adopted as well.
In April 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the EPA has authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles. On December 15, 2009, the EPA published a final determination, which became effective on January 14, 2010, that certain greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles endanger public health and welfare due to climate change. On September 28, 2009, the EPA published a proposed rule regulating greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles under the Clean Air Act. The EPA has stated that once this rule is currently developing its responseeffective, it will cause carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to this decision. Regulatory decisions that will follow from this response may have implicationsbecome regulated pollutants under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) preconstruction permit program and the Title V operating permit program, which both apply to power plants. As a result, the construction of new facilities or the major modification of existing facilities could trigger the requirement for both newa PSD permit and existingthe installation of the best available control technology for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. The EPA also published a proposed rule governing how these programs would be applied to stationary sources, such asincluding power plants.plants, on October 27, 2009. The EPA has stated that it expects to finalize these proposed rules in March 2010. The ultimate outcome of the endangerment finding and these rulemaking activitiesproposed rules cannot be determined at this time; however, as withtime and will depend on additional regulatory action and any legal challenges.
International climate change negotiations under the current legislative proposals,United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change also continue. A nonbinding agreement was announced during the most recent round of negotiations in December 2009 that included a pledge from both developed and developing countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. The outcome and impact of the international negotiations cannot be determined at this time.

II-110


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Although the outcome of federal, state, or international initiatives cannot be determined at this time, mandatory restrictions on the Company’s greenhouse gas emissions couldor requirements relating to renewable energy or energy efficiency on the federal or state level are likely to result in significant additional compliance costs, thatincluding significant capital expenditures. These costs could affect future unit retirement and replacement decisions, and could result in the retirement of a significant number of coal-fired generating units. Also, additional compliance costs and costs related to unit retirements could affect results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates. Further, higher costs that are recovered through regulated rates could contribute to reduced demand for electricity, which could negatively impact results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition.
In addition, some states are considering or have undertaken actions to regulate and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For example, on June 25, 2008, Florida’s Governor signed comprehensive energy-related legislation that includes authorization for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to adopt rules for a cap-and-trade regulatory program to address greenhouse gastotal carbon dioxide emissions from the fossil fuel-fired electric utilities, conditioned upon their ratificationgenerating units owned by the legislature no sooner than the 2010 legislative session. This legislation also authorizes the Florida PSCCompany were approximately 47 million metric tons. The preliminary estimate of carbon dioxide emissions from these units in 2009 is approximately 43 million metric tons. The level of carbon dioxide emissions from year to adopt a renewable portfolio standard for public utilities, subject to legislative ratification. The impact of any similar state legislationyear will be dependent on the Company will depend onlevel of generation and mix of fuel sources, which is determined primarily by demand, the future development, adoption, legislative ratification, implementation, and potential legal challenges to rules governing greenhouse gas emissions and mandates regarding the useunit cost of renewable energy,fuel consumed, and the ultimate outcome cannot be determined at this time.
International climate change negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change also continue. Current efforts focus on a potential successor to the Kyoto Protocol for the post 2012 timeframe, with a conclusion to this roundavailability of negotiations targeted for the end of 2009. The outcome and impact of the international negotiations cannot be determined at this time.

II-120


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
generating units.
The Company continues to evaluate its future energy and emissionemissions profiles and is participating in voluntary programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to help develop and advance technology to reduce emissions.
FERC Matters
Market-Based Rate Authority
The Company has authorization from the FERC to sell power to non-affiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices. Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based contract with an affiliate.
In December 2004, the FERC initiated a proceeding to assess Southern Company’s generation dominance within its retail service territory. The ability to charge market-based rates in other markets is not an issue in the proceeding. Any new market-based rate sales by the Company in Southern Company’s retail service territory entered into during a 15-month refund period that ended in May 2006 could be subject to refund to a cost-based rate level.
In November 2007, the presiding administrative law judge issued an initial decision regarding the methodology to be used in the generation dominance tests. The proceedings are ongoing. The ultimate outcome of this generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined, but an adverse decision by the FERC in a final order could require the Company to charge cost-based rates for certain wholesale sales in the Southern Company retail service territory, which may be lower than negotiated market-based rates, and could also result in total refunds of up to $3.9 million, plus interest. The Company believes that there is no meritorious basis for an adverse decision in this proceeding and is vigorously defending itself in this matter.
In June 2007, the FERC issued its final rule in Order No. 697 regarding market-based rate authority. The FERC generally retained its current market-based rate standards. Responding to a number of requests for rehearing, the FERC issued Order No. 697-A on April 21, 2008 and Order No. 697-B on December 12, 2008. These orders largely affirmed the FERC’s prior revision and codification of the regulations governing market-based rates for public utilities. In accordance with the orders, Southern Company submitted to the FERC an updated market power analysis on September 2, 2008 related to its continued market-based rate authority. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
On October 17, 2008, Southern Company filed with the FERC a revised market-based rate (MBR) tariff and a new cost-based rate (CBR) tariff. The revised MBR tariff provides for a “must offer” energy auction whereby Southern Company offers all of its available energy for sale in a day-ahead auction and an hour-ahead auction with reserve prices not to exceed the CBR tariff price, after considering Southern Company’s native load requirements, reliability obligations, and sales commitments to third parties. All sales under the energy auction would be at market clearing prices established under the auction rules. The new CBR tariff provides for a cost-based price for wholesale sales of less than a year. On December 18, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the MBR tariff subject to certain revisions to the auction proposal. On January 21, 2009, Southern Company made a compliance filing that accepted all the conditions of the MBR tariff order. When this order becomes final, Southern Company will have 30 days to implement the wholesale auction. On December 31, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the CBR tariff subject to providing additional information concerning one aspect of the tariff. On January 30, 2009, Southern Company filed a response addressing the FERC inquiry to the CBR tariff order. Implementation of the energy auction in accordance with the MBR tariff order is expected to adequately mitigate going forward any presumption of market power that Southern Company may have in the Southern Company retail service territory. The timing of when the FERC may issue the final orders on the MBR and CBR tariffs and the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Generation Interconnection Agreements
In November 2004, generator company subsidiaries of Tenaska, Inc. (Tenaska), as counterparties to two previously executed interconnection agreements with the Company, filed complaints at the FERC requesting that the FERC modify the agreements and that the Company refund a total of $11.0 million previously paid for interconnection facilities. No other similar complaints are pending with the FERC.
In January 2007, the FERC issued an order granting Tenaska’s requested relief. Although the FERC’s order required the modification of Tenaska’s interconnection agreements, under the provisions of the order, the Company determined that no refund was payable to Tenaska. The Company requested rehearing asserting that the FERC retroactively applied a new principle to existing interconnection agreements. Tenaska requested rehearing of FERC’s methodology for determining the amount of refunds. The requested rehearings

II-121


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
were denied and the Company and Tenaska have appealed the orders to the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia. The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
Hydro Relicensing
In July 2005, the Company filed two applications with the FERC for new 50-year licenses for the Company’s seven hydroelectric developments on the Coosa River (Weiss, Henry, Logan Martin, Lay, Mitchell, Jordan, and Bouldin) and for the Lewis Smith and Bankhead developments on the Warrior River. The FERC licenses for all of these nine projects expired in July and August of 2007. Since the FERC did not act on the Company’s new license applications prior to the expiration of the existing licenses, the FERC is required by law to issue annual licenses to the Company, under the terms and conditions of the existing license, until action is taken on the new license applications. The FERC issued an annual license for the Coosa developments in August 2007 and issued an annual license for the Warrior developments in September 2007. These annual licenses arewere automatically renewed each yearin 2009 without further action by the FERC to allow the Company to continue operation of the projects under the terms of the previous license while the FERC completes review of the applications for new licenses.
In 2006, the Company initiated the process of developing an application to relicense the Martin hydroelectric project located on the Tallapoosa River. The current Martin license will expire in 2013 and the application for a new license is expected to be filed with the FERC in 2011.
In 2010, the Company will initiate the process of developing an application to relicense the Holt hydroelectric project located on the Warrior River. The current Holt license will expire on August 31, 2015, and the application for a new license is expected to be filed prior to that time.
Upon or after the expiration of each license, the U.S. Government, by act of Congress, may take over the project or the FERC may relicense the project either to the original licensee or to a new licensee. The FERC may grant relicenses subject to certain requirements that could result in additional costs to the Company. The timing and final outcome of the Company’s relicense applications cannot now be determined.
PSC Matters
Retail Rate Adjustments
In October 2005, the Alabama PSC approved a revision to Rate RSE requested by the Company. Effective January 2007 and thereafter,
Rate RSE adjustments are based on forward-looking information for the applicable upcoming calendar year. Rate adjustments for any two-year period, when averaged together, cannot exceed 4%4.0% per year and any annual adjustment is limited to 5%5.0%. Retail rates remain unchanged when the retail return on retail common equity is projected to be between 13.0% and 14.5%. If the Company’s actual retail return on common equity is above the allowed equity return range, customer refunds will be required; however, there is no provision for additional customer billings should the actual retail return on common equity fall below the allowed equity return range.

II-111


On
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
In October 7, 2008, the Alabama PSC approved a corrective rate package, effective January 2009, that primarily providingprovides for adjustments associated with customer charges to certain existing rate structures. This package, effective in January 2009, is expected to generate additional annual revenues of approximately $168 million. The Company agreed to a moratorium on any increase in rates in 2009 under the Rate RSE.
On December 1, 2008,2009, the Company made its Rate RSE submission to the Alabama PSC of projected data for calendar year 2009. See Note 32010. The Rate RSE increase for 2010 is 3.24%, or $152 million annually, and was effective in January 2010. The revenue adjustment under the Rate RSE is largely attributable to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters —costs associated with fossil capacity which is currently dedicated to certain long-term wholesale contracts that expire during 2010. Retail cost of service for 2010 reflects the cost for that portion of the year in which this capacity is no longer committed to wholesale. The termination of these long-term wholesale contracts will result in a significant decrease in unit power sales capacity revenues. In an Alabama PSC order dated January 5, 2010, the Alabama PSC acknowledged that a full calendar year of costs for such capacity would be reflected in the Rate RSE”RSE calculation beginning in 2011 and thereafter. Under the terms of Rate RSE, the maximum increase for further information.2011 cannot exceed 4.76%.
Rate CNP
The Company’s retail rates, approved by the Alabama PSC, also provide for adjustments to recognize the placing of new generating facilities into retail service and the recovery of retail costs associated with certificated power purchase agreements (PPAs) under a Rate CNP. In April 2006, an annual adjustment to Rate CNP, associated with PPAs, increased retail rates by approximately 0.5%, or $19 million annually. There was no rate adjustment associated with the annual adjustment to Rate CNP, associated with PPAs, or the true-up adjustment in April 2007 and 2008. There will be no adjustment to the current Rate CNP to recover certificated PPA costs in 2007, 2008, or 2009. Effective April 2009. See Note 32010, Rate CNP will be reduced approximately $70 million annually, primarily due to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Rate CNP” for additional information.expiration on May 31, 2010 of the PPA with Southern Power covering the capacity of Plant Harris Unit 1.
Rate CNP also allows for the recovery of the Company’s retail costs associated with environmental laws, regulations, or other such mandates. The rate mechanism is based on forward-lookingforward looking information and provides for the recovery of these costs pursuant to a factor that is calculated annually. Environmental costs to be recovered include operations and maintenance expenses, depreciation, and a return on invested capital. Retail rates increased due to environmental costs approximately 1.2% in January 2006, 0.6% in January 2007 and 2.4% in January 2008. On2008 due to environmental costs. In October 7, 2008, the Alabama PSC approved a corrective rate package primarily providing for adjustments associated with customer charges to certain existing rate structures. As a part of the Alabama PSC approval of the corrective rate package, the Alabama PSC and the Company agreed to defer collection of any increase in rates under this portion of Rate CNP, which permits recovery of costs associated with environmental rate increaselaws and regulations, from 2009 tountil 2010. This

II-122


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The deferral will haveof the retail rate adjustments had an immaterial impact on annual cash flows, and will havehad no significant effect on the Company’s revenues or net income. On December 1, 2008,2009, the Company made its Rate CNP environmental submission of projected data for calendar year 2009.2010, resulting in an increase to retail rates of approximately 4.3%, or an additional $195 million annually, based upon projected billings. Under the terms of the rate mechanism, this adjustment became effective in January 2010. The Rate CNP environmental adjustment is primarily attributable to scrubbers being placed in service during 2010 at four of the Company’s generating units. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters”Matters — Rate CNP” for further information.
Retail Fuel Cost Recovery
The Company has established fuel cost recovery rates under Rate ECR approved by the Alabama PSC. Rates are based on an estimate of future energy costs and the current over or under recovered balance. The Company, along with the Alabama PSC, will continue to monitor the underover recovered fuel cost balance to determine whether an additional adjustment to billing rates is required.
In June 2007, the Alabama PSC ordered the Company to increase its Rate ECR factor to 3.100 cents per KWH effective with billings beginning July 2007 for the 30-month period ending December 2009. The previous rate of 2.400 cents per KWH had been in effect since January 2006. This increase was intended to permit recovery of energy costs based on an estimate of future energy cost, as well as the collection of the existing under recovered energy cost by the end of 2009. During the recovery period, the Company was allowed to include a carrying charge associated with the under recovered fuel costs in the fuel expense calculation.2007. In the event the application of this increased Rate ECR factor results in an over recovered position during this period, the Company would pay interest on any such over recovered balance at the same rate used to derive the carrying cost.
On October 7, 2008, the Alabama PSC approved an increase in the Company’s Rate ECR factor to 3.983 cents per KWH effective with billings beginning October 2008.
On June 2, 2009, the Alabama PSC approved a decrease in the Company’s Rate ECR factor to 3.733 cents per KWH for billings beginning June 9, 2009. On December 1, 2009, the Alabama PSC approved a 24-month perioddecrease in the Company’s Rate ECR factor to 2.731 cents per KWH for billings beginning with October 9, 2008 billings. Thereafter,January 2010 through December 2011. The Alabama PSC further approved an additional reduction in the Rate ECR factor isof 0.328 cents per KWH for the billing months of January 2010 through December 2010 resulting in a Rate ECR factor of 2.403 cents per KWH for such 12-month period. For billing months beginning January 2012, the Rate ECR factor shall be 5.910 cents per KWH, absent a contrary order by the Alabama PSC. The previous rate of 3.100 cents per KWH had beenRate ECR revenues, as recorded on the financial statements, are adjusted for the difference in effect since June 2007. During the 24-month period, the Company will be allowed to continue to include a carrying charge associated with the under recoveredactual recoverable fuel costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Accordingly, the approved decreases in the fuel expense calculation. In the event the application of this increased Rate ECR factor resultswill have no significant effect on the Company’s net income, but will decrease operating cash flows related to fuel cost recovery in 2010 when compared to 2009.
As of December 31, 2009, the Company had an over recovered position during this period, the Company will pay interest on any suchfuel balance of approximately $199.6 million, of which approximately $22.1 million is included in deferred over recovered regulatory clause revenues in the balance at the same rate used to derive the carrying cost.
The Company’s under recovered fuel costs assheets. As of December 31, 2008, totaledthe

II-112


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Company had an under recovered fuel balance of approximately $305.8 million, as compared to $279.8 million at December 31, 2007. As a result of the Alabama PSC orders, the Company classifiedwhich approximately $180.9 million and $81.7 million of theis included in deferred under recovered regulatory clause revenues as deferred charges and other assets in the balance sheets as of December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007, respectively. This classification issheets. These classifications are based on an estimateestimates, which includesinclude such factors as weather, generation availability, energy demand, and the price of energy. A change in any of these factors could have a material impact on the timing of any return of the over recovered fuel costs or recovery of the under recovered fuel costs.
Rate ECR revenues, as recorded on See Note 3 to the financial statements are adjustedunder “Retail Regulatory Matters — Fuel Cost Recovery” for the difference in actual recoverable costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Accordingly, this approved increase in the billing factor will have no significant effect on the Company’s revenues or net income, but will increase annual cash flow.further information.
Natural Disaster Cost RecoveryReserve
Based on an order from the Alabama PSC, the Company maintains a reserve for operations and maintenance expense to cover the cost of damages from major storms to its transmission and distribution facilities. See Note 1 and Note 3 to the financial statements under “Natural Disaster Reserve” and “Retail Regulatory Matters — Natural Disaster Cost Recovery,” respectively, for additional information on these reserves.
In December 2005, the Alabama PSC approvedThe order approves a request by the Company to replenish the depletedseparate monthly natural disaster reserve (NDR) duecharge to hurricanes in 2005 and allow for recovery of future natural disaster costs. The Alabama PSC order gives the Company authority to record a deficit balance in the NDR when costs of uninsured storm damage exceed any established reserve balance. The order also approved a separate monthly NDR chargecustomers consisting of two components beginning in January 2006.components. The first component is intended to establish and maintain a target reserve balance of $75 million for future storms and is an on-going part of customer billing. Assuming no additional storms, the Company currently expects that the target reserve balance could be achieved within three years. The second component of the NDR charge is intended to allow recovery of any existing deferred hurricane relatedstorm-related operations and maintenance costs and any future reserve deficits over a 24-month period. The Alabama PSC order gives the Company authority to record a deficit balance in the NDR when costs of storm damage exceed any established reserve balance. Absent further Alabama PSC approval, the maximum total NDR charge consisting of both components is $10 per month per non-residential customer account and $5 per month per residential customer account.

II-123


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power The Company 2008 Annual Report
has discretionary authority to accrue certain additional amounts as circumstances warrant.
At December 31, 2008,In addition to the monthly NDR charge, the Company hadaccrued $39.6 million of discretionary reserve in 2009 resulting in an accumulated balance of $33.2approximately $75 million in the target reserve for future storms whichas of December 31, 2009. This reserve is included in other regulatory liabilities, deferred in the balance sheets under “Other Regulatory Liabilities.” In June 2007,sheets. Effective February 2010, billings will be reduced to $0.37 per month per non-residential customer account and $0.15 per month per residential customer account, consistent with the Alabama PSC order to maintain the target NDR balance. The Company has fully recovered its deferred storm costs of $51.3 million resulting from previous hurricanes. As a result, customercosts; therefore, rates decreased by this portiondo not include the second component of the NDR charge effective in July 2007.charge.
As revenue from the NDR charge is recognized, an equal amount of operations and maintenance expenses related to the NDR will also be recognized. As a result, this increaseany change in revenue and expense will not have an impacteffect on net income but will increasedecrease operating cash flows related to the NDR charge in 2010 when compared to 2009.
The net effect of the changes in 2010 in the Rate ECR factor, Rate RSE, Rate CNP, and NDR will result in an overall annual cash flow.reduction in the Company’s retail customers’ billings of approximately $433 million.
Income Tax MattersSteam Service
On February 5, 2009, the Alabama PSC granted a Certificate of Abandonment of Steam Service in the downtown area of the City of Birmingham. The order allows the Company to discontinue steam service by the earlier of three years from May 14, 2008 or when it has no remaining steam service customers. Currently, the Company has contractual obligations to provide steam service until 2013. Impacts related to the abandonment of steam service are recognized in operating income and are not material to the earnings of the Company.
Legislation
On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). Major tax incentives in the ARRA include an extension of bonus depreciation and multiple renewable energy incentives. These incentives, which could have a significant impact on the Company’s future cash flow and net income. Additionally,income of the Company. The Company’s cash flow reduction to 2009 tax payments as a result of the bonus depreciation provisions of the ARRA includes programswas approximately $104 million. On December 8, 2009, President Obama announced proposals to accelerate job growth that include an extension of the bonus depreciation provision for renewable energy,the ARRA for 2010, which could have a significant impact on the future cash flow and net income of the Company.
On October 27, 2009, Southern Company and its subsidiaries received notice that an award of $165 million had been granted, of which $65 million is available to the Company, under the ARRA grant application for transmission and smart grid enhancement, fossil energydistribution automation and research,modernization projects pending final negotiations. The Company continues to assess the other financial implications of the ARRA.
The U.S. House of Representatives and energy efficiency and conservation. the U.S. Senate have passed separate bills related to healthcare reform. Both bills include a provision that would make Medicare Part D subsidy reimbursements taxable. If enacted into law, this provision could have a

II-113


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
significant negative impact on the Company’s net income. See Note 2 to the financial statements under “Other Postretirement Benefits” for additional information.
The ultimate impact of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Internal Revenue Code Section 199 Domestic Production DeductionIncome Tax Matters
The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 created a tax deduction for a portion of income attributable to U.S. production activities as defined in Section 199 (production activities deduction) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Internal Revenue Code).amended. The deduction is equal to a stated percentage of qualified production activities net income. The percentage is phased in over the years 2005 through 2010 with a 3% rate applicable to the years 2005 and 2006, a 6% rate applicable for the years 2007 through 2009, and a 9% rate thereafter. The Internal Revenue Service has not clearly defined a methodology for calculating this deduction. However, Southern Company has agreed with the IRS on a calculation methodology and signed a closing agreement on December 11, 2008. Therefore, the Company reversed the unrecognized tax benefit and adjusted the deduction to conform to the agreement. The net impact of the reversal of the unrecognized tax benefits combined with the application of the new methodology had no material effect on the Company’s financial statements. See Note 5 to the financial statements under “Effective Tax Rate” for additional information.
Other Matters
In accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Statement No. 87, Employers’ Accountingaccounting standards related to employers’ accounting for Pensions,pensions, the Company recorded non-cash pre-tax pension income of approximately $24 million, $26 million, and $17 million in 2009, 2008, and $13 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Postretirement benefit costs for the Company were $19 million, $23 million, and $27 million in 2009, 2008, and $28 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Such amounts are dependent on several factors including trust earnings and changes to the plans. A portion of pension and postretirement benefit costs is capitalized based on construction-related labor charges. Pension and postretirement benefit costs are a component of the regulated rates and generally do not have a long-term effect on net income. For more information regarding pension and postretirement benefits, see Note 2 to the financial statements.
The Company is involved in various other matters being litigated and regulatory matters that could affect future earnings. In addition, the Company is subject to certain claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. In addition, theThe Company’s business activities are subject to extensive governmental regulation related to public health and the environment.environment, such as regulation of air emissions and water discharges. Litigation over environmental issues and claims of various types, including property damage, personal injury, common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of environmental requirements such as opacity and air and water quality standards, has increased generally throughout the United States. In particular, personal injury and other claims for damages caused by alleged exposure to hazardous materials, and common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas and other emissions, have become more frequent. The ultimate outcome of such pending or potential litigation against the Company cannot be predicted at this time; however, for current proceedings not specifically reported herein, management does not anticipate that the liabilities, if any, arising from such current proceedings would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial statements. See Note 3 to the financial statements for information regarding material issues.

II-124


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The Company prepares its financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Significant accounting policies are described in Note 1 to the financial statements. In the application of these policies, certain estimates are made that may have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations and related disclosures. Different assumptions and measurements could produce estimates that are significantly different from those recorded in the financial statements. Senior management has reviewed and discussed critical accounting policies and estimates described below with the Audit Committee of Southern Company’s Board of Directors.
Electric Utility Regulation
The Company is subject to retail regulation by the Alabama PSC and wholesale regulation by the FERC. These regulatory agencies set the rates the Company is permitted to charge customers based on allowable costs. As a result, the Company applies FASB Statement No. 71, “Accounting for the Effects of Certain Types of Regulation” (SFAS No. 71),accounting standards which requiresrequire the financial statements to reflect the effects of rate regulation. Through the ratemaking process, the regulators may require the inclusion of costs or revenues in periods different than when they would be recognized by a non-regulated company. This treatment may result in the deferral of expenses and the recording of related regulatory assets based on anticipated future recovery through rates or the deferral of gains or creation of liabilities and the recording of related regulatory liabilities. The application of SFAS No. 71the accounting standards has a further effect on the Company’s financial statements as a result of the estimates of allowable costs used in the ratemaking process. These estimates may differ from those actually incurred by the Company; therefore,

II-114


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
the accounting estimates inherent in specific costs such as depreciation, nuclear decommissioning, and pension and postretirement benefits have less of a direct impact on the Company’s financial statements than they would on a non-regulated company.
As reflected in Note 1 to the financial statements under “Regulatory Assets and Liabilities,” significant regulatory assets and liabilities have been recorded. Management reviews the ultimate recoverability of these regulatory assets and liabilities based on applicable regulatory guidelines and accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. However, adverse legislative, judicial, or regulatory actions could materially impact the amounts of such regulatory assets and liabilities and could adversely impact the Company’s results of operations.
Contingent Obligations
The Company is subject to a number of federal and state laws and regulations, as well as other factors and conditions that potentially subject it to environmental, litigation, income tax, and other risks. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL herein and Note 3 to the financial statements for more information regarding certain of these contingencies. The Company periodically evaluates its exposure to such risks and, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), records reserves for those matters where a non-tax-related loss is considered probable and reasonably estimable and records a tax asset or liability if it is more likely than not that a tax position will be sustained. The adequacy of reserves can be significantly affected by external events or conditions that can be unpredictable; thus, the ultimate outcome of such matters could materially affect the Company’s financial statements.
These events or conditions include the following:
 Changes in existing state or federal regulation by governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, coal combustion byproducts, including coal ash, control of toxic substances, hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters.
 
 Changes in existing income tax regulations or changes in IRSInternal Revenue Service (IRS) or Alabama Department of Revenue interpretations of existing regulations.
 
 Identification of sites that require environmental remediation or the filing of other complaints in which the Company may be asserted to be a potentially responsible party.
 
 Identification and evaluation of other potential lawsuits or complaints in which the Company may be named as a defendant.
 
 Resolution or progression of new or existing matters through the legislative process, the court systems, the IRS, the Alabama Department of Revenue, the FERC, or the EPA.

II-125


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Unbilled Revenues
Revenues related to the retail sale of electricity are recorded when electricity is delivered to customers. However, the determination of KWH sales to individual customers is based on the reading of their meters, which is performed on a systematic basis throughout the month. At the end of each month, amounts of electricity delivered to customers, but not yet metered and billed, are estimated. Components of the unbilled revenue estimates include total KWH territorial supply, total KWH billed, estimated total electricity lost in delivery, and customer usage. These components can fluctuate as a result of a number of factors including weather, generation patterns, power delivery volume, and other operational constraints. These factors can be unpredictable and can vary from historical trends. As a result, the overall estimate of unbilled revenues could be significantly affected, which could have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations.
Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits
The Company’s calculation of pension and other postretirement benefits expense is dependent on a number of assumptions. These assumptions include discount rates, health care cost trend rates, expected long-term return on plan assets, mortality rates, expected salary and wage increases, and other factors. Components of pension and other postretirement benefits expense include interest and service cost on the pension and other postretirement benefit plans, expected return on plan assets, and amortization of certain unrecognized costs and obligations. Actual results that differ from the assumptions utilized are accumulated and amortized over future periods and, therefore, generally affect recognized expense and the recorded obligation in future periods. While the Company believes that the assumptions used are appropriate, differences in actual experience or significant changes in assumptions would affect its pension and other postretirement benefits costs and obligations.

II-115


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Key elements in determining the Company’s pension and other postretirement benefit expense in accordance with GAAP are the expected long-term return on plan assets and the discount rate used to measure the benefit plan obligations and the periodic benefit plan expense for future periods. The expected long-term return on postretirement benefit plan assets is based on the Company’s investment strategy, historical experience, and expectations for long-term rates of return that considers external actuarial advice. The Company determines the long-term return on plan assets by applying the long-term rate of expected returns on various asset classes to the Company’s target asset allocation. The Company discounts the future cash flows related to its postretirement benefit plans using a single-point discount rate developed from the weighted average of market-observed yields for high quality fixed income securities with maturities that correspond to expected benefit payments.
A 25 basis point change in any significant assumption would result in a $6 million or less change in total benefit expense and a $68 million or less change in projected obligations.
New Accounting Standards
Variable Interest Entities
In June 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued new guidance on the consolidation of variable interest entities, which replaces the quantitative-based risks and rewards calculation for determining whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary in a variable interest entity with an approach that is primarily qualitative, requires ongoing assessments of whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity, and requires additional disclosures about an enterprise’s involvement in variable interest entities. The Company adopted this new guidance effective January 1, 2010, with no material impact on its financial statements.
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY
Overview
The Company’s financial condition remained stable at December 31, 2008.2009. Throughout the recent turmoil in the financial markets, the Company has maintained adequate access to capital without drawing on any of its committed bank credit arrangements used to support its commercial paper programs and variable rate pollution control revenue bonds. The Company has continued to issue commercial paper at reasonable rates. The Company intends to continue to monitor its access to short-term and long-term capital markets as well as its bank credit arrangements to meet future capital and liquidity needs. No material changes in bank credit arrangements have occurred, although marketMarket rates for committed credit have increased, and the Company mayhas been and expects to continue to be subject to higher costs as its existing facilities are replaced or renewed. The Company’s interest costTotal committed credit fees for short-term debt has decreased as market short-term interest rates have declined. The ultimate impact on future financing costs as a resultthe Company average less than1/4 of the financial turmoil cannot be determined at this time. The Company experienced no material counterparty credit losses as a result of the turmoil in the financial markets.1% per year. See “Sources of Capital” and “Financing Activities” herein for additional information.
The Company’s investments in pension and nuclear decommissioning trust funds declinedremained stable in value as of December 31, 2008.2009. The Company expects that the earliest that cash may have to be contributed to the pension trust fund is 2011 and such contribution could be significant; however,2012. The projections of the amount vary significantly depending on interpretations of and decisions related to federal legislation passed during 2008 as well as other key variables, including future trust fund performance, and cannot be determined at this time. The Company does not expect any changes to theCompany’s funding obligations tofor the nuclear decommissioning trust at this time.are based on the site study, and the next study is expected to be conducted in 2013.
Net cash provided from operating activities in 2009 totaled $1.6 billion, an increase of $424 million as compared to 2008. The increase was primarily due to an increase in net income, as previously discussed, a decrease in receivables, and an increase in other current liabilities attributable to collections on regulatory clauses. Net cash provided from operating activities in 2008 totaled $1.2 billion, an increase of $30 million as compared to 2007. Significant changes in operating cash flow for 2008The increase included an increase in theadditional use of funds for fossil fuel inventory and payment of operating expenses along with a higher receivables balance as compared to 2007. This use of funds was offset by an increase in cash from net income as previously discussed and higher depreciation expense along with a decrease in the payments for federal taxes as compared to 2007. Net cash provided from operating activities in 2007 totaled $1.2 billion, an increase of $194 million as compared to 2006. The increase was primarily due to an increase in net income resulting from price increases, an increase in deferred taxes, and the timing of payments related to operating expenses. Net cash provided from operating activities in 2006 totaled $956 million, an increase of $48 million as compared to 2005. The increase was primarily due to higher recovery rates for fuel and purchased power partially offset by the timing of payments for operating expenses.
Net cash used for investing activities totaled $1.2 billion, $1.6 billion, and $1.3 billion for 2009, 2008, and $1.0 billion for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively, primarily due to gross property additions to utility plant of $1.2 billion, $1.5 billion and $1.2 billion for 2009, 2008, and $0.9 billion for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. These additions were primarily related to environmental mandates, construction of transmission and distribution facilities, replacement of steam generation equipment, and purchases of nuclear fuel,fuel.

II-116


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Net cash used for financing activities totaled $35 million in 2009 primarily due to redemptions of debt securities and environmental mandates.
Netdividends paid in excess of debt issuances and cash raised from common stock sales. In 2008 and 2007, net cash provided from financing activities totaled $375 million in 2008,and $162 million, in 2007, and $14 million in 2006respectively, primarily due to long termlong-term debt issuances and cash raised from common stock sales in excess of redemptions of securities and dividends paid. Fluctuations in cash flow from financing activities vary from year to year based on capital needs and securities redeemed.
Significant balance sheet changes for 2009 include increases of $340 million in cash primarily from collections on regulatory clauses. These cash collections correspondingly decreased current and deferred under recovered regulatory clause revenues by $297 million and increased current and deferred over recovered regulatory clause revenues by $204 million. Other changes include increases of $939 million in gross plant related to environmental mandates and transmission and distribution projects and $478 million in long-term debt. In 2008, includesignificant balance sheet changes included an increase of $966 million in gross plant and an increase of $855 million in long-term debt, primarily due to an increase in environmental-related equipment. Other significant balance sheet changes in 2008 were a result of a decline in the market value of the Company’s pension trust and nuclear decommissioning trust funds, impacting the Company’s other regulatory assets and liabilities. See Note 1 to the financial statements under “Regulatory Assets and Liabilities” and “Nuclear

II-126


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Decommissioning” and Note 2 under “Pension Plans” for additional information. In 2007, significant balance sheet changes included an increase of $671 million in gross plant and an increase of $602 million in long-term debt, primarily due to an increase in environmental-related equipment.
The Company’s ratio of common equity to total capitalization, including short-term debt, was 43.3% in 2009, 42.5% in 2008, and 42.5% in 2007, and 42.1% in 2006.2007. See Note 6 to the financial statements for additional information.
The Company has maintained investment grade credit ratings from the major rating agencies with respect to debt, preferred securities, preferred stock, and preference stock. See SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA for additional information regarding the Company’s securities ratings.
Sources of Capital
The Company plans to obtain the funds required for construction and other purposes from sources similar to those used in the past, which were primarily from operating cash flows, unsecured debt, common stock, preferred stock, and preference stock. However, the type and timing of any financings will depend on market conditions, regulatory approval, and other factors.
Security issuances are subject to regulatory approval by the Alabama PSC. Additionally, with respect to the public offering of securities, the Company files registration statements with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. The amounts of securities authorized by the Alabama PSC are continuously monitored and appropriate filings are made to ensure flexibility in the capital markets.
The Company obtains financing separately without credit support from any affiliate. See Note 6 to the financial statements under “Bank Credit Arrangements” for additional information. The Southern Company system does not maintain a centralized cash or money pool. Therefore, funds of the Company are not commingled with funds of any other company.
The Company’s current liabilities sometimes exceed current assets because of the Company’s debt due within one year and the periodic use of short-term debt as a funding source primarily to meet scheduled maturities of long-term debt, as well as cash needs which can fluctuate significantly due to the seasonality of the business.
To meet short-term cash needs and contingencies, the Company has various internal and external sources of liquidity. At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had approximately $28.2$368 million of cash and cash equivalents and $1.3 billion of unused credit arrangements with banks, as described below. In addition, the Company has substantial cash flow from operating activities and access to the capital markets, including a commercial paper program, to meet liquidity needs.
The Company maintains committed lines of credit in the amount of $1.3 billion, of which $466$481 million will expire at various times during 2009. $3792010. $372 million of the credit facilities expiring in 20092010 allow for the execution of term loans for an additional one-year period. $765 million of credit facilities expire in 2012. A portion of the unused credit with banks is allocated to provide liquidity support to the Company’s variable rate pollution control revenue bonds. The amount of variable rate pollution control revenue bonds requiring liquidity support as of December 31, 2009 was approximately $608 million. Subsequent to December 31, 2009, two remarketings of pollution control revenue bonds increased that amount to $744 million. See Note 6 to the financial statements under “Bank Credit Arrangements” for additional information.

II-117


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The Company may also meet short-term cash needs through a Southern Company subsidiary organized to issue and sell commercial paper at the request and for the benefit of the Company and the other traditional operating companies. Proceeds from such issuances for the benefit of the Company are loaned directly to the Company and are not commingled with proceeds from such issuances for the benefit of any other traditional operating company. The obligations of each company under these arrangements are several and there is no cross affiliatecross-affiliate credit support.
As of December 31, 2008, the Company had $25 million of commercial paper outstanding. As of December 31, 2007, theThe Company had no commercial paper outstanding.

II-127


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
outstanding as of December 31, 2009, and $25 million outstanding as of December 31, 2008.
Financing Activities
During 2008,In March 2009, the Company issued $850$500 million of senior notesSeries 2009A 6.00% Senior Notes due March 1, 2039. The proceeds were used to repay short-term indebtedness and for other general corporate purposes, including the Company’s continuous construction program.
In June 2009, the Company incurred obligations related to the issuance of $254$53 million of tax-exempt bonds. the Industrial Development Board of the City of Mobile, Alabama Pollution Control Revenue Bonds (Alabama Power Barry Plant Project), First Series 2009. The proceeds were used to fund pollution control and environmental improvement facilities at Plant Barry.
In addition,July 2009, the Company issued a total of 7.5 million3,375,000 shares of its common stock to Southern Company at $40.00 per$40 a share and realized proceeds of $300 million.($135 million aggregate purchase price). The proceeds were used for general corporate purposes.
In August 2009, the Company’s $250 million Series BB Floating Rate Senior Notes due August 25, 2009 matured.
In October 2009, the Company issued 1,687,500 shares of these issuancescommon stock to Southern Company at $40 a share ($67.5 million aggregate purchase price). The proceeds were used for general corporate purposes.
In December 2009, the Company incurred obligations related to the issuance of $25.5 million of the Industrial Development Board of the City of Mobile, Alabama Solid Waste Disposal Revenue Bonds (Alabama Power Barry Plant Project), Second Series 2009. The proceeds were used to repay short-term indebtedness, to fund certain pollution control, environmental improvement facilities and solid waste disposal facilities and for general corporate purposes.
Also during 2008, the Company paid at maturity $410 million of senior notes and redeemed 1,250 shares of its Flexible Money Market Class A Preferred Stock (Series 2003A), Stated Capital $100,000 Per Share ($125 million aggregate value).
Also during 2008, the Company entered into $330 million notional amount of interest rate swaps related to variable rate pollution control revenue bonds to hedge changes in interest rates for the period February 2008 through February 2010. The weighted average fixed payment rate on these hedges is 2.49% and the Company now has a total of $576 million of such hedges in place, with an overall weighted average fixed payment rate of 2.69%.
The Company converted its $246.5 million obligation related to auction rate pollution control revenue bonds from an auction rate mode to fixed rate interest modes. With the completion of this conversion in March 2008, none of the outstanding securities or obligations of the Company is subject to an auction rate mode.
Also during 2008, the Company was required to purchase a total of approximately $11 million of variable rate pollution control revenue bonds that were tendered by investors, all of which were subsequently remarketed.Plant Barry.
In addition to any financings that may be necessary to meet capital requirements and contractual obligations, the Company plans to continue, when economically feasible, a program to retire higher-cost securities and replace these obligations with lower-cost capital if market conditions permit.
Credit Rating Risk
The Company does not have any credit arrangements that would require material changes in payment schedules or terminations as a result of a credit rating downgrade. There are certain contracts that could require collateral, but not accelerated payment, in the event of a credit rating change to BBB- and/or Baa3 or below. These contracts are primarily for physical electricity purchases and sales, fuel purchases, fuel transportation and storage, emissionemissions allowances, and energy price risk management. At December 31, 2008,2009, the maximum potential collateral requirements under these contracts at a BBB- and/or Baa3 rating were approximately $2$5 million. At December 31, 2008,2009, the maximum potential collateral requirements under these contracts at a rating below BBB- and/or Baa3 were approximately $99$324 million. Included in these amounts are certain agreements that could require collateral in the event that one or more Southern Company system power pool participants has a credit rating change to below investment grade. Generally, collateral may be provided by a Southern Company guaranty, letter of credit, or cash. Additionally, any credit rating downgrade could impact the Company’s ability to access capital markets, particularly the short-term debt market.
Market Price Risk
Due to cost-based rate regulations, the Company has limited exposure to market volatility in interest rates, commodity fuel prices, and prices of electricity. To manage the volatility attributable to these exposures, the Company nets the exposures, where possible, to take advantage of natural offsets and enters into various derivative transactions for the remaining exposures pursuant to the Company’s policies in areas such as counterparty exposure and risk management practices. Company policy is that derivatives are to be used primarily for hedging purposes and mandates strict adherence to all applicable risk management policies. Derivative positions are monitored using techniques including, but not limited to, market valuation, value at risk, stress testing, and sensitivity analysis.

II-128II-118


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
To mitigate future exposure to changes in interest rates, the Company enters into forward starting interest rate swaps and other derivatives that have been designated as hedges. The weighted average interest rate on $250$232 million of long-term variable interest rate exposure that has not been hedged at January 1, 20092010 was 2.34%3.0%. If the Company sustained a 100 basis point change in interest rates for all unhedged variable rate long-term debt, the change would affect annualized interest expense by approximately $2.5$2.3 million at January 1, 2009.2010. For further information, see NotesNote 1 and 6 to the financial statements under “Financial Instruments.”Instruments” and Note 11 to the financial statements.
To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in electricity prices, the Company enters into fixed-price contracts for the purchase and sale of electricity through the wholesale electricity market and, to a lesser extent, into financial hedge contracts for natural gas purchases. The Company has implemented fuel hedging programs per the guidelines of the Alabama PSC.
In addition, the Company’s Rate ECR allows the recovery of specific costs associated with the sales of natural gas that become necessary due to operating considerations at the Company’s electric generating facilities. Rate ECR also allows recovery of the cost of financial instruments used for hedging market price risk up to 75% of the budgeted annual amount of natural gas purchases. The Company may not engage in natural gas hedging activities that extend beyond a rolling 42-month window. Also, the premiums paid for natural gas financial options may not exceed 5% of the Company’s natural gas budget for that year.
The changes in fair value of energy-related derivative contracts were as follows at December 31:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 Changes Changes Changes Changes
 Fair Value Fair Value
 (in millions) (in millions)
Contracts outstanding at the beginning of the period, assets (liabilities), net $(0.4) $(32.6) $(92) $ 
Contracts realized or settled  (44.0) 31.5  123  (44)
Current period changes(a)
  (47.5) 0.7   (75)  (48)
Contracts outstanding at the end of the period, assets (liabilities), net $(91.9) $(0.4) $(44) $(92)
(a) Current period changes also include the changes in fair value of new contracts entered into during the period, if any.
The decreasechange in the fair value positions of the energy-related derivative contracts for the year-endedyear ended December 31, 20082009 was $91.5an increase of $47.6 million, substantially all of which is due to natural gas positions. ThisThe change is attributable to both the volume of million British thermal units (mmBtu) and prices of natural gas. At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had a net hedge volume of 44.5 billion cubic feet (Bcf)37.3 million mmBtu with a weighted average contract cost approximately $2.12$1.20 per million British thermal units (mmBtu)mmBtu above market prices, and 27.4 Bcf44.5 million mmBtu at December 31, 20072008 with a weighted average contract cost approximately $0.02$2.12 per mmBtu above market prices. The majority of the natural gas hedges are recovered through the fuel cost recovery clauses.clause.
At December 31, the net fair value of energy-related derivative contracts by hedge designation was reflected in the financial statements as assets/(liabilities) as follows:
                
 2008 2007
Asset (Liability) Derivatives 2009 2008
 (in millions) (in millions)
Regulatory hedges $(91.9) $(0.7) $(44) $(92)
Cash flow hedges  0.5    
Non-accounting hedges   (0.2)
Not designated   
Total fair value $(91.9) $(0.4) $(44) $(92)
Energy-related derivative contracts which are designated as regulatory hedges relate to the Company’s fuel hedging program where gains and losses are initially recorded as regulatory liabilities and assets, respectively, and then are included in fuel expense as they are recovered through the fuel cost recovery clauses.clause. Certain other gains and losses on energy-related derivatives, designated as cash flow hedges, are initially deferred in other comprehensive income before being recognized in income in the same period as the hedged transaction. Gains and losses on energy-related derivative contracts that are not designated or fail to qualify as hedges are recognized in the statements of income as incurred.
Unrealized pre-tax gains and losses from energy-related derivative contracts recognized in income were not material for any year presented.

II-129II-119


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
The maturities of the energy-related derivative contracts and the level of the fair value hierarchy in which they fall at December 31, 20082009 are as follows:
                                
 December 31, 2008 December 31, 2009
 Fair Value Measurements Fair Value Measurements
 Total Maturity Total Maturity
 Fair Value Year 1 Years 2&3 Years 4&5 Fair Value Year 1 Years 2&3 Years 4&5
 (in millions)  (in millions)
Level 1 $ $ $ $  $ $ $ $ 
Level 2  (91.9)  (71.4)  (20.5)    (44)  (34)  (10)  
Level 3          
Fair value of contracts outstanding at end of period $(91.9) $(71.4) $(20.5) $  $(44) $(34) $(10) $ 
As part of the adoption of FASB Statement No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” to increase consistency and comparability in fair value measurements and related disclosures, the table above now uses the three-tier fair value hierarchy, as discussed in Note 10 to the financial statements, as opposed to the previously used descriptions “actively quoted,” “external sources,” and “models and other methods.” The three-tier fair value hierarchy focuses on the fair value of the contract itself, whereas the previous descriptions focused on the source of the inputs. Because the Company uses over-the-counter contracts that are not exchange traded but are fair valued using prices which are actively quoted, and thus fall into Level 2. See Note 10 to the valuations of those contracts now appear in Level 2; previously they were shown as “actively quoted.”financial statements for further discussion on fair value measurement.
The Company is exposed to market price risk in the event of nonperformance by counterparties to energy-related and interest rate derivative contracts. The Company’s practice is to enterCompany only enters into agreements and material transactions with counterparties that have investment grade credit ratings by Moody’s and Standard & Poor’sS&P or with counterparties who have posted collateral to cover potential credit exposure. Therefore, the Company does not anticipate market risk exposure from nonperformance by the counterparties. For additional information, see NotesNote 1 and 6 to the financial statements under “Financial Instruments.”Instruments” and Note 11 to the financial statements.
Capital Requirements and Contractual Obligations
The construction program of the Company is currently estimated to be $1.4 billion for 2009, $1.0 billion for 2010, and $1.0 billion for 2011.2011, and $1.1 billion for 2012. Environmental expenditures included in these estimated amounts are $584$136 million, $131$85 million, and $59$99 million for 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2011,2012, respectively. Also included over the next three years, the Company estimates spending $586$653 million on Plant Farley (including $341 million for nuclear fuel), $950$882 million on distribution facilities, and $387$481 million on transmission additions. See Note 7 to the financial statements under “Construction Program” for additional details.
The construction programs are subject to periodic review and revision, and actual construction costs may vary from these estimates because of numerous factors. These factors include: changes in business conditions; revised load growth estimates; changes in environmental statutes and regulations; changes in nuclear plants to meet new regulatory requirements; changes in FERC rules and regulations; Alabama PSC approvals; changes in legislation; the cost and efficiency of construction labor, equipment, and materials; project scope and design changes; and the cost of capital. In addition, there can be no assurance that costs related to capital expenditures will be fully recovered. As a result of Nuclear Regulatory Commission requirements, the Company has external trust funds for nuclear decommissioning costs; however, the Company currently has no additional funding requirements. For additional information, see Note 1 to the financial statements under “Nuclear Decommissioning.”
In addition to the funds required for the Company’s construction program, approximately $550$800 million will be required by the end of 20112012 for maturities of long-term debt. The Company plans to continue, when economically feasible, to retire higher cost securities and replace these obligations with lower-costlower cost capital if market conditions permit.
The Company has also established an external trust fund for postretirement benefits as ordered by the Alabama PSC. The cumulative effect of funding these items over a longan extended period will diminish internally funded capital for other purposes and may require the Company to seek capital from other sources. For additional information, seeSee Note 2 to the financial statements under “Postretirement Benefits.”for additional information.
Other funding requirements related to obligations associated with scheduled maturities of long-term debt, and preferred securities, as well as the related interest, derivative obligations, preferred and preference stock dividends, leases, and other purchase commitments are as follows. See Notes 1, 6, 7, and 711 to the financial statements for additional information.

II-130II-120


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Contractual Obligations
                                            
 2010- 2012- After   2011- 2013- After Uncertain  
 2009 2011 2013 2013 Total 2010 2012 2014 2014 Timing(d) Total
 (in millions) (in millions)
Long-term debt(a)
  
Principal $250 $300 $750 $4,558 $5,858  $100 $700 $250 $5,136 $ $6,186 
Interest 291 549 499 4,351 5,690  311 603 530 4,846  6,290 
Preferred and preference stock dividends(b)
 39 79 79  197  39 79 79   197 
Energy-related derivative obligations(c)
 75 20   95  34 11    45 
Operating leases 23 28 12 11 74  22 21 8 10  61 
Purchase commitments(d)
 
Capital(e)
 1,365 1,865   3,230 
Limestone(f)
 3 24 29 68 124 
Unrecognized tax benefits and interest(d)
     6 6 
Purchase commitments(e)
 
Capital(f)
 912 1,919    2,831 
Limestone(g)
 11 30 32 54  127 
Coal 1,461 1,804 1,110 1,414 5,789  1,420 1,589 923 975  4,907 
Nuclear fuel 48 82 76 10 216  73 99 60 90  322 
Natural gas(g)
 505 386 311 210 1,412 
Natural gas(h)
 413 451 254 148  1,266 
Purchased power 105 44   149  39 60 67 337  503 
Long-term service agreements(h)
 18 35 29 37 119 
Postretirement benefits trust(i)
 17 35   52 
Long-term service agreements(i)
 23 48 50 135  256 
Postretirement benefits trust(j)
 11 22    33 
Total $4,200 $5,251 $2,895 $10,659 $23,005  $3,408 $5,632 $2,253 $11,731 $6 $23,030 
(a) All amounts are reflected based on final maturity dates. The Company plans to continue to retire higher-cost securities and replace these obligations with lower-cost capital if market conditions permit. Variable rate interest obligations are estimated based on rates as of January 1, 2009,2010, as reflected in the statements of capitalization. Fixed rates include, where applicable, the effects of interest rate derivatives employed to manage interest rate risk.
 
(b) Preferred and preference stock do not mature; therefore, amounts are provided for the next five years only.
 
(c) For additional information, see Notes 1 and 611 to the financial statements.
 
(d)The timing related to the realization of $6 million in unrecognized tax benefits and interest payments in individual years beyond 12 months cannot be reasonably and reliably estimated due to uncertainties in the timing of the effective settlement of tax positions. See Note 5 to the financial statements for additional information.
(e) The Company generally does not enter into non-cancelable commitments for other operations and maintenance expenditures. Total other operations and maintenance expenses for 2009, 2008, and 2007 and 2006 were $1.21 billion, $1.26 billion, $1.19 billion, and $1.10$1.19 billion, respectively.
 
(e)(f) The Company forecasts capital expenditures over a three-year period. Amounts represent current estimates of total expenditures excluding those amounts related to contractual purchase commitments for nuclear fuel. At December 31, 2008,2009, significant purchase commitments were outstanding in connection with the construction program.
 
(f)(g) As part of the Company’s program to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions from certain of its coal plants, the Company has begun construction of flue gas desulfurization projects and has entered into various long-term commitments for the procurement of limestone to be used in suchflue gas desulfurization equipment.
 
(g)(h) Natural gas purchase commitments are based on various indices at the time of delivery. Amounts reflected have been estimated based on the New York Mercantile Exchange future prices at December 31, 2008.2009.
 
(h)(i) Long-term service agreements include price escalation based on inflation indices.
 
(i)(j) The Company forecasts postretirement trust contributions over a three-year period. The Company expects that the earliest that cash may have to be contributed to the pension trust fund is 2011 and such contribution could be significant; however,2012. The projections of the amount vary significantly depending on interpretations of and decisions related to federal legislation passed during 2008 as well as other key variables including future trust fund performance and cannot be determined at this time. Therefore, no amounts related to the pension trust are included in the table. See Note 2 to the financial statements for additional information related to the pension and postretirement plans, including estimated benefit payments. Certain benefit payments will be made through the related trusts. Other benefit payments will be made from the Company’s corporate assets.

II-131II-121


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)(Continued)
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
The Company’s 20082009 Annual Report contains forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements concerning retail sales growth and retail rates, storm damage cost recovery and repairs, fuel cost recovery and other rate actions, environmental regulations and expenditures, access to sources of capital, projections for postretirement benefit and nuclear decommissioning trust contributions, financing activities, start and completion of construction projects, filings with state and federal regulatory authorities, impacts of adoption of new accounting rules, impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, impact of healthcare legislation, if any, estimated sales and purchases under new power sale and purchase agreements, and estimated construction and other expenditures. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “could,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “projects,” “predicts,” “potential,” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other similar terminology. There are various factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those suggested by the forward-looking statements; accordingly, there can be no assurance that such indicated results will be realized. These factors include:
  the impact of recent and future federal and state regulatory change, including legislative and regulatory initiatives regarding deregulation and restructuring of the electric utility industry, implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, environmental laws including regulation of water quality and emissions of sulfur, nitrogen, mercury, carbon, soot, or particulate matter, or coal combustion byproducts and other substances, and also changes in tax and other laws and regulations to which the Company is subject, as well as changes in application of existing laws and regulations;
 
  current and future litigation, regulatory investigations, proceedings, or inquiries, including FERC matters and the pending EPA civil action against the Company;
 
  the effects, extent, and timing of the entry of additional competition in the markets in which the Company operates;
 
  variations in demand for electricity, including those relating to weather, the general economy and recovery from the recent recession, population and business growth (and declines), and the effects of energy conservation measures;
 
  available sources and costs of fuels;
 
  effects of inflation;
 
  ability to control costs;costs and avoid cost overruns during the development and construction of facilities;
 
  investment performance of the Company’s employee benefit plans;plans and nuclear decommissioning trusts;
 
  advances in technology;
 
  state and federal rate regulations and the impact of pending and future rate cases and negotiations, including rate actions relating to fuel and storm restorationother cost recovery;recovery mechanisms;
 
  internal restructuring or other restructuring options that may be pursued;
 
  potential business strategies, including acquisitions or dispositions of assets or businesses, which cannot be assured to be completed or beneficial to the Company;
 
  the ability of counterparties of the Company to make payments as and when due and to perform as required;
 
  the ability to obtain new short- and long-term contracts with neighboring utilities;wholesale customers;
 
  the direct or indirect effect on the Company’s business resulting from terrorist incidents and the threat of terrorist incidents;
 
  interest rate fluctuations and financial market conditions and the results of financing efforts, including the Company’s credit ratings;
 
  the ability of the Company to obtain additional generating capacity at competitive prices;
 
  catastrophic events such as fires, earthquakes, explosions, floods, hurricanes, droughts, pandemic health events such as an avian influenza,influenzas, or other similar occurrences;
 
  the direct or indirect effects on the Company’s business resulting from incidents similar toaffecting the August 2003 power outage in the Northeast;U.S. electric grid or operation of generating resources;
 
  the effect of accounting pronouncements issued periodically by standard-settingstandard setting bodies; and
 
  other factors discussed elsewhere herein and in other reports (including the Form 10-K) filed by the Company from time to time with the SEC.
The Company expressly disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

II-132II-122


STATEMENTS OF INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                        
 2008 2007 2006  2009 2008 2007 
 (in thousands)  (in thousands) 
  
Operating Revenues:
  
Retail revenues $4,862,281 $4,406,956 $3,995,731  $4,497,081 $4,862,281 $4,406,956 
Wholesale revenues — 
Non-affiliates 711,903 627,047 634,552 
Affiliates 308,482 144,089 216,028 
Wholesale revenues, non-affiliates 619,859 711,903 627,047 
Wholesale revenues, affiliates 236,995 308,482 144,089 
Other revenues 194,265 181,901 168,417  174,639 194,265 181,901 
Total operating revenues 6,076,931 5,359,993 5,014,728  5,528,574 6,076,931 5,359,993 
Operating Expenses:
  
Fuel 2,184,310 1,762,418 1,672,831  1,823,784 2,184,310 1,762,418 
Purchased power — 
Non-affiliates 178,807 96,928 124,022 
Affiliates 359,202 341,461 302,045 
Purchased power, non-affiliates 87,737 178,807 96,928 
Purchased power, affiliates 218,654 359,202 341,461 
Other operations and maintenance 1,258,888 1,186,235 1,096,978  1,211,245 1,258,888 1,186,235 
Depreciation and amortization 520,449 471,536 451,018  544,923 520,449 471,536 
Taxes other than income taxes 306,522 286,579 258,135  322,274 306,522 286,579 
Total operating expenses 4,808,178 4,145,157 3,905,029  4,208,617 4,808,178 4,145,157 
Operating Income
 1,268,753 1,214,836 1,109,699  1,319,957 1,268,753 1,214,836 
Other Income and (Expense):
  
Allowance for equity funds used during construction 45,519 35,425 18,253  79,175 45,519 35,425 
Interest income 19,394 19,545 20,897  16,906 19,394 19,545 
Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized  (278,917)  (273,737)  (252,282)  (298,495)  (278,917)  (273,737)
Other income (expense), net  (31,514)  (29,144)  (23,758)  (24,564)  (31,514)  (29,144)
Total other income and (expense)  (245,518)  (247,911)  (236,890)  (226,978)  (245,518)  (247,911)
Earnings Before Income Taxes
 1,023,235 966,925 872,809  1,092,979 1,023,235 966,925 
Income taxes 367,813 351,198 330,345  383,980 367,813 351,198 
Net Income
 655,422 615,727 542,464  708,999 655,422 615,727 
Dividends on Preferred and Preference Stock
 39,463 36,145 24,734  39,463 39,463 36,145 
Net Income After Dividends on Preferred and Preference Stock
 $615,959 $579,582 $517,730  $669,536 $615,959 $579,582 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-133II-123


STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                        
 2008 2007 2006  2009 2008 2007 
 (in thousands)  (in thousands) 
  
Operating Activities:
  
Net income $655,422 $615,727 $542,464  $708,999 $655,422 $615,727 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided from operating activities —  
Depreciation and amortization 599,767 548,959 524,313 
Deferred income taxes and investment tax credits, net 126,538 21,269  (27,562)
Depreciation and amortization, total 636,788 599,767 548,959 
Deferred income taxes  (65,907) 126,538 21,269 
Allowance for equity funds used during construction  (45,519)  (35,425)  (18,253)  (79,175)  (45,519)  (35,425)
Pension, postretirement, and other employee benefits  (26,530)  (18,781)  (15,196)  (25,802)  (26,530)  (18,781)
Stock based compensation expense 3,105 4,900 4,848  3,767 3,105 4,900 
Tax benefit of stock options 685 1,118 610  166 685 1,118 
Other, net 27,689  (13,650) 29,564  62,318 27,687  (13,648)
Changes in certain current assets and liabilities —  
Receivables  (31,693)  (5,797)  (33,260)
Fossil fuel stock  (134,212)  (33,840)  (28,179)
Materials and supplies  (17,723)  (32,543)  (25,711)
Other current assets  (1,494) 22,354 38,645 
Accounts payable  (8,751) 78,508  (49,725)
Accrued taxes 36,957  (17,248) 1,124 
Accrued compensation  (4,722) 4,194  (6,157)
Other current liabilities  (198) 10,098 18,486 
-Receivables 310,203  (31,692)  (5,798)
-Fossil fuel stock  (76,602)  (134,212)  (33,840)
-Materials and supplies  (21,989)  (17,723)  (32,543)
-Other current assets  (16,253)  (1,493) 22,353 
-Accounts payable  (18,767)  (8,751) 78,508 
-Accrued taxes 24,415 36,957  (17,248)
-Accrued compensation  (31,684)  (4,722) 4,194 
-Other current liabilities 192,835  (198) 10,098 
Net cash provided from operating activities 1,179,321 1,149,843 956,011  1,603,312 1,179,321 1,149,843 
Investing Activities:
  
Property additions  (1,477,643)  (1,157,186)  (933,306)  (1,233,580)  (1,477,644)  (1,157,186)
Investment in restricted cash from pollution control bonds  (96,326)  (97,775)    (5,673)  (96,326)  (97,775)
Distribution of restricted cash from pollution control bonds 35,979 78,043   49,041 35,979 78,043 
Nuclear decommissioning trust fund purchases  (300,503)  (334,275)  (286,551)  (244,662)  (300,503)  (334,275)
Nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales 299,636 333,409 285,685  243,796 299,636 333,409 
Cost of removal net of salvage  (41,744)  (48,932)  (40,834)  (37,883)  (41,744)  (48,932)
Other  (19,143)  (26,621)  (1,777)
Other investing activities 165  (19,142)  (26,621)
Net cash used for investing activities  (1,599,744)  (1,253,337)  (976,783)  (1,228,796)  (1,599,744)  (1,253,337)
Financing Activities:
  
Increase (decrease) in notes payable, net 24,995  (119,670)  (195,609)  (24,995) 24,995  (119,670)
Proceeds —  
Senior notes 850,000 850,000 950,000 
Preferred and preference stock  200,000 150,000 
Common stock issued to parent 300,000 229,000 120,000  202,500 300,000 229,000 
Capital contributions 21,272 27,867 27,160 
Capital contributions from parent company 23,949 21,272 27,867 
Gross excess tax benefit of stock options 1,289 2,556 1,291  485 1,289 2,556 
Preference stock   200,000 
Pollution control revenue bonds 265,100 265,500   78,500 265,100 265,500 
Senior notes issuances 500,000 850,000 850,000 
Redemptions —  
Senior notes  (410,000)  (668,500)  (546,500)
Preferred stock  (125,000)      (125,000)  
Pollution control revenue bonds  (11,100)   (2,950)   (11,100)  
Senior notes  (250,000)  (410,000)  (668,500)
Other long-term debt   (103,093)      (103,093)
Payment of preferred and preference stock dividends  (40,899)  (31,380)  (24,318)  (39,470)  (40,899)  (31,380)
Payment of common stock dividends  (491,300)  (465,000)  (440,600)  (522,800)  (491,300)  (465,000)
Other  (9,369)  (25,709)  (24,635)
Other financing activities  (2,850)  (9,369)  (25,709)
Net cash provided from financing activities 374,988 161,571 13,839 
Net cash provided from (used for) financing activities  (34,681) 374,988 161,571 
Net Change in Cash and Cash Equivalents
  (45,435) 58,077  (6,933) 339,835  (45,435) 58,077 
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Year
 73,616 15,539 22,472  28,181 73,616 15,539 
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Year
 $28,181 $73,616 $15,539  $368,016 $28,181 $73,616 
Supplemental Cash Flow Information:
  
Cash paid during the period for —  
Interest (net of $20,215, $17,961, and $7,930 capitalized, respectively) $258,918 $248,289 $245,387 
Interest (net of $33,112, $20,215 and $17,961 capitalized, respectively) 254,989�� 258,918 248,289 
Income taxes (net of refunds) 214,368 340,951 345,803  426,390 214,368 340,951 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-134II-124


BALANCE SHEETS
At December 31, 20082009 and 20072008
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                
Assets 2008 2007  2009 2008  
 (in thousands)  (in thousands) 
  
Current Assets:
  
Cash and cash equivalents $28,181 $73,616  $368,016 $28,181 
Restricted cash 80,079 19,732  36,711 80,079 
Receivables —  
Customer accounts receivable 350,409 357,355  322,292 350,410 
Unbilled revenues 98,921 95,278  134,875 98,921 
Under recovered regulatory clause revenues 153,899 232,226  37,338 153,899 
Other accounts and notes receivable 44,645 42,745  33,522 44,645 
Affiliated companies 70,612 61,250  61,508 70,612 
Accumulated provision for uncollectible accounts  (8,882)  (7,988)  (9,551)  (8,882)
Fossil fuel stock, at average cost 322,089 182,963  394,511 322,089 
Materials and supplies, at average cost 305,880 287,994  326,074 305,880 
Vacation pay 52,577 50,266  53,607 52,577 
Prepaid expenses 88,220 72,952  111,320 88,219 
Other 87,740 19,610 
Other regulatory assets, current 34,347 74,825 
Other current assets 6,203 12,915 
Total current assets 1,674,370 1,487,999  1,910,773 1,674,370 
Property, Plant, and Equipment:
  
In service 17,635,129 16,669,142  18,574,229 17,635,129 
Less accumulated provision for depreciation 6,259,720 5,950,373  6,558,864 6,259,720 
 11,375,409 10,718,769 
Plant in service, net of depreciation 12,015,365 11,375,409 
Nuclear fuel, at amortized cost 231,862 137,146  253,308 231,862 
Construction work in progress 1,092,516 928,182  1,256,311 1,092,516 
Total property, plant, and equipment 12,699,787 11,784,097  13,524,984 12,699,787 
Other Property and Investments:
  
Equity investments in unconsolidated subsidiaries 50,912 48,664  59,628 50,912 
Nuclear decommissioning trusts, at fair value 403,966 542,846  489,795 403,966 
Other 62,782 31,146 
Miscellaneous property and investments 69,749 62,782 
Total other property and investments 517,660 622,656  619,172 517,660 
Deferred Charges and Other Assets:
  
Deferred charges related to income taxes 362,596 347,193  387,447 362,596 
Prepaid pension costs 166,334 989,085  132,643 166,334 
Deferred under recovered regulatory clause revenues 180,874 81,650   180,874 
Other regulatory assets 732,367 224,792 
Other 202,018 209,153 
Other regulatory assets, deferred 750,492 732,367 
Other deferred charges and assets 198,582 202,018 
Total deferred charges and other assets 1,644,189 1,851,873  1,469,164 1,644,189 
Total Assets
 $16,536,006 $15,746,625  $17,524,093 $16,536,006 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-135II-125


BALANCE SHEETS
At December 31, 20082009 and 20072008
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                
Liabilities and Stockholder’s Equity 2008 2007  2009 2008 
 (in thousands)  (in thousands) 
  
Current Liabilities:
  
Securities due within one year $250,079 $535,152  $100,000 $250,079 
Notes payable 24,995    24,995 
Accounts payable —  
Affiliated 178,708 193,518  194,675 178,708 
Other 358,176 308,177  328,400 358,176 
Customer deposits 77,205 67,722  86,975 77,205 
Accrued taxes —  
Income taxes 18,299 45,958 
Other 30,372 29,198 
Accrued income taxes 14,789 18,299 
Other accrued taxes 31,918 30,372 
Accrued interest 56,375 55,263  65,455 56,375 
Accrued vacation pay 44,217 42,138  44,751 44,217 
Accrued compensation 91,856 92,385  71,286 91,856 
Liabilities from risk management activities 83,873 6,404  37,844 83,873 
Other 53,777 48,927 
Over recovered regulatory clause revenues 181,565  
Other current liabilities 40,020 53,777 
Total current liabilities 1,267,932 1,424,842  1,197,678 1,267,932 
Long-term Debt(See accompanying statements)
 5,604,791 4,750,196 
Long-Term Debt(See accompanying statements)
 6,082,489 5,604,791 
Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities:
  
Accumulated deferred income taxes 2,243,117 2,065,264  2,293,468 2,243,117 
Deferred credits related to income taxes 90,083 93,709  88,705 90,083 
Accumulated deferred investment tax credits 172,638 180,578  164,713 172,638 
Employee benefit obligations 396,923 349,974  387,936 396,923 
Asset retirement obligations 461,284 505,794  491,007 461,284 
Other cost of removal obligations 634,792 613,616  668,151 634,792 
Other regulatory liabilities 79,150 637,040 
Other 45,859 31,417 
Other regulatory liabilities, deferred 169,224 79,151 
Deferred over recovered regulatory clause revenues 22,060  
Other deferred credits and liabilities 37,113 45,858 
Total deferred credits and other liabilities 4,123,846 4,477,392  4,322,377 4,123,846 
Total Liabilities
 10,996,569 10,652,430  11,602,544 10,996,569 
Preferred and Preference Stock(See accompanying statements)
 685,127 683,512 
Redeemable Preferred Stock(See accompanying statements)
 341,715 341,715 
Preference Stock(See accompanying statements)
 343,373 343,412 
Common Stockholder’s Equity(See accompanying statements)
 4,854,310 4,410,683  5,236,461 4,854,310 
Total Liabilities and Stockholder’s Equity
 $16,536,006 $15,746,625  17,524,093 $16,536,006 
Commitments and Contingent Matters(See notes)
  
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-136II-126


STATEMENTS OF CAPITALIZATION
At December 31, 20082009 and 20072008
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                                
 2008 2007 2008 2007  2009 2008 2009 2008 
 (in thousands) (percent of total)  (in thousands) (percent of total) 
  
Long-Term Debt:
  
Long-term debt payable to affiliated trusts —  
5.5% due 2042 $206,186 $206,186 
Variable rate (3.35% at 1/1/10) due 2042 $206,186 $206,186 
Long-term notes payable —  
3.125% to 5.375% due 2008  410,000 
Floating rate (2.34% at 1/1/09) due 2009 250,000 250,000   250,000 
4.70% due 2010 100,000 100,000  100,000 100,000 
5.10% due 2011 200,000 200,000  200,000 200,000 
4.85% due 2012 500,000 200,000  500,000 500,000 
5.80% due 2013 250,000   250,000 250,000 
5.125% to 6.375% due 2016-2047 3,275,000 2,975,000  3,775,000 3,275,000 
Total long-term notes payable 4,575,000 4,135,000  4,825,000 $4,575,000 
Other long-term debt —  
Pollution control revenue bonds: 
2.00% to 5.00% due 2030-2038 500,500  
Variable rates (0.92% to 1.83% at 1/1/09) due 2015-2036 576,190 822,690 
Pollution control revenue bonds — 
1.40% to 5.00% due 2030-2038 553,500 500,500 
Variable rates (0.18% to 0.44% at 1/1/10) due 2015-2036 601,690 576,190 
Total other long-term debt 1,076,690 822,690  1,155,190 1,076,690 
Capitalized lease obligations 79 231   79 
Unamortized debt premium (discount), net  (3,085)  (3,759)   (3,887)  (3,085) 
Total long-term debt (annual interest requirement — $290.8 million) 5,854,870 5,160,348 
Total long-term debt (annual interest requirement — $311.4 million) 6,182,489 5,854,870 
Less amount due within one year 250,079 410,152  100,000 250,079 
Long-term debt excluding amount due within one year 5,604,791 4,750,196  50.3%  48.3% 6,082,489 5,604,791  50.7%  50.3%

II-137II-127


STATEMENTS OF CAPITALIZATION(continued)
At December 31, 20082009 and 20072008
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                                
 2008 2007 2008 2007  2009 2008 2009 2008 
 (in thousands) (percent of total)  (in thousands) (percent of total) 
  
Preferred and Preference Stock:
  
Cumulative preferred stock
 
Cumulative redeemable preferred stock
 
$100 par or stated value — 4.20% to 4.92%  
Authorized — 3,850,000 shares  
Outstanding — 475,115 shares 47,610 47,610  47,610 47,610 
$1 par value — 5.20% to 5.83%  
Authorized — 27,500,000 shares  
Outstanding — 12,000,000 shares: $25 stated value 294,105 294,105  294,105 294,105 
Outstanding — 2008: 0 shares
2007: 1,250 shares: $100,000 stated capital
  123,331 
Preference stock
  
Authorized — 40,000,000 shares  
Outstanding — $1 par value — 5.63% to 6.50%
— 14,000,000 shares
(non-cumulative) $25 stated value
 343,412 343,466  343,373 343,412 
Total preferred and preference stock
(annual dividend requirement — $39.5 million)
 685,127 808,512  685,088 685,127 5.7 6.1 
Less amount due within one year  125,000 
Preferred and preference stock excluding amount due within one year 685,127 683,512 6.1 6.9 
Common Stockholder’s Equity:
  
Common stock, par value $40 per share —
Authorized — 2008: 40,000,000 shares
— 2007: 25,000,000 shares
Outstanding — 2008: 25,475,000 shares
— 2007: 17,975,000 shares
 1,019,000 719,000 
Common stock, par value $40 per share —
Authorized — 2009: 40,000,000 shares
— 2008: 40,000,000 shares
Outstanding — 2009: 30,537,500 shares
— 2008: 25,475,000 shares
 1,221,500 1,019,000 
Paid-in capital 2,091,462 2,065,298  2,119,818 2,091,462 
Retained earnings 1,753,797 1,630,832  1,900,526 1,753,797 
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)  (9,949)  (4,447)   (5,383)  (9,949) 
Total common stockholder’s equity 4,854,310 4,410,683 43.6 44.8  5,236,461 4,854,310 43.6 43.6 
Total Capitalization
 $11,144,228 $9,844,391  100.0%  100.0% $12,004,038 $11,144,228  100.0%  100.0%
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-138II-128


STATEMENTS OF COMMON STOCKHOLDER’S EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                     
 
              Accumulated  
  Common Paid-In Retained Other Comprehensive  
  Stock Capital Earnings Income (Loss) Total
  (in thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2005
 $370,000  $1,995,056  $1,439,144  $(11,474) $3,792,726 
Net income after dividends on preferred stock        517,730      517,730 
Issuance of common stock  120,000            120,000 
Capital contributions from parent company     33,907         33,907 
Other comprehensive income (loss)           (4,057)  (4,057)
Adjustment to initially apply FASB Statement No. 158, net of tax           12,610   12,610 
Cash dividends on common stock        (440,600)     (440,600)
Other        (29)     (29)
 
Balance at December 31, 2006
  490,000   2,028,963   1,516,245   (2,921)  4,032,287 
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock        579,582      579,582 
Issuance of common stock  229,000            229,000 
Capital contributions from parent company     36,441         36,441 
Other comprehensive income (loss)           (1,526)  (1,526)
Cash dividends on common stock        (465,000)     (465,000)
Other     (106)  5      (101)
 
Balance at December 31, 2007
  719,000   2,065,298   1,630,832   (4,447)  4,410,683 
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock        615,959      615,959 
Issuance of common stock  300,000            300,000 
Capital contributions from parent company     26,164         26,164 
Other comprehensive income (loss)           (5,502)  (5,502)
Cash dividends on common stock        (491,300)     (491,300)
Other        (1,694)     (1,694)
 
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $1,019,000  $2,091,462  $1,753,797  $( 9,949) $4,854,310 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2008, 2007, and 2006
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
             
 
  2008  2007  2006 
  (in thousands)     
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock
 $615,959  $579,582  $517,730 
 
Other comprehensive income (loss):            
Qualifying hedges:            
Changes in fair value, net of tax of $(4,297), $(1,226), and $155, respectively  (7,068)  (2,017)  255 
Reclassification adjustment for amounts included in net income, net of tax of $952, $298, and $(3,696), respectively  1,566   491   (6,080)
Pension and other postretirement benefit plans:            
Change in additional minimum pension liability, net of tax of $-, $-, and $1,109, respectively        1,768 
 
Total other comprehensive income (loss)  (5,502)  (1,526)  (4,057)
 
Comprehensive Income
 $610,457  $578,056  $513,673 
 
                         
 
  Number of             Accumulated  
  Common             Other  
  Shares Common Paid-In Retained Comprehensive  
  Issued Stock Capital Earnings Income (Loss) Total
  (in thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2006
  12,250  $490,000  $2,028,963  $1,516,245  $(2,921) $4,032,287 
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock           579,582      579,582 
Issuance of common stock  5,725   229,000            229,000 
Capital contributions from parent company        36,441         36,441 
Other comprehensive income (loss)              (1,526)  (1,526)
Cash dividends on common stock           (465,000)     (465,000)
Other        (106)  5      (101)
 
Balance at December 31, 2007
  17,975   719,000   2,065,298   1,630,832   (4,447)  4,410,683 
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock           615,959      615,959 
Issuance of common stock  7,500   300,000            300,000 
Capital contributions from parent company        26,164         26,164 
Other comprehensive income (loss)              (5,502)  (5,502)
Cash dividends on common stock           (491,300)     (491,300)
Other           (1,694)     (1,694)
 
Balance at December 31, 2008
  25,475   1,019,000   2,091,462   1,753,797   (9,949)  4,854,310 
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock           669,536      669,536 
Issuance of common stock  5,063   202,500            202,500 
Capital contributions from parent company        28,356         28,356 
Other comprehensive income (loss)              4,566   4,566 
Cash dividends on common stock           (522,800)     (522,800)
Other           (7)     (7)
 
Balance at December 31, 2009
  30,538  $1,221,500  $2,119,818  $1,900,526  $(5,383) $5,236,461 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-139II-129


STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
             
 
  2009  2008  2007 
  (in thousands) 
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock
 $669,536  $615,959  $579,582 
 
Other comprehensive income (loss):            
Qualifying hedges:            
Changes in fair value, net of tax of $(1,943), $(4,297), and $(1,226), respectively  (3,195)  (7,068)  (2,017)
Reclassification adjustment for amounts included in net income, net of tax of $4,718, $952, and $298, respectively  7,761   1,566   491 
 
Total other comprehensive income (loss)  4,566   (5,502)  (1,526)
 
Comprehensive Income
 $674,102  $610,457  $578,056 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-130


NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
General
Alabama Power Company (the Company) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Southern Company, which is the parent company of four traditional operating companies, Southern Power Company (Southern Power), Southern Company Services, Inc. (SCS), Southern Communications Services, Inc. (SouthernLINC Wireless), Southern Company Holdings, Inc. (Southern Holdings), Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (Southern Nuclear), and other direct and indirect subsidiaries. The traditional operating companies — the Company, Georgia Power Company (Georgia Power), Gulf Power Company (Gulf Power), and Mississippi Power Company (Mississippi Power)., are vertically integrated utilities providing electric service in four Southeastern states. The Company providesoperates as a vertically integrated utility providing electricity to retail and wholesale customers within its traditional service area located withinin the State of Alabama andin addition to wholesale customers in the Southeast. Southern Power constructs, acquires, owns, and manages generation assets, and sells electricity at market-based rates in the wholesale market. SCS, the system service company, provides, at cost, specialized services to Southern Company and its subsidiary companies. SouthernLINC Wireless provides digital wireless communications for use by Southern Company and its subsidiary companies and also markets these services to the public and provides fiber cable services within the Southeast. Southern Holdings is an intermediate holding company subsidiary for Southern Company’s investments in leveraged leases and various other energy-related businesses. The investments in synthetic fuels ended on December 31, 2007.leases. Southern Nuclear operates and provides services to Southern Company’s nuclear power plants, including the Company’s Plant Farley.
The equity method is used for subsidiaries in which the Company has significant influence but does not control and for variable interest entities where the Company is not the primary beneficiary. Certain prior years’ data presented in the financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation.
The Company is subject to regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Alabama Public Service Commission (PSC). The Company follows accounting principles generally accepted in the United States and complies with the accounting policies and practices prescribed by its regulatory commissions. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires the use of estimates, and the actual results may differ from those estimates.
Reclassifications
Certain prior years’ data presented in the financial statements have been reclassified to conform with current year presentation. The statements of cash flows for the prior periods presented have been modified within the operating activities section to combine the amount of “Deferred revenues” and “Hedge settlements” into “Other, net.” The statements of income for the prior periods presented have been modified within the operating expenses section to combine the line items “Other operations” and “Maintenance” into a single line item entitled “Other operations and maintenance.” The balance sheet at December 31, 2007 was modified to present a separate line for “Liabilities for risk management activities” previously included in “Other.” These reclassifications had no effect on total assets, cash flows, or net income.
Affiliate Transactions
The Company has an agreement with SCS under which the following services are rendered to the Company at direct or allocated cost: general and design engineering, purchasing, accounting and statistical analysis, finance and treasury, tax, information resources, marketing, auditing, insurance and pension administration, human resources, systems and procedures, digital wireless communications, and other services with respect to business and operations and power pool transactions. Costs for these services amounted to $325 million, $321 million, and $299 million, during 2009, 2008, and $266 million during 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Cost allocation methodologies used by SCS were approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission prior to the repeal of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, as amended, and management believes they are reasonable. The FERC permits services to be rendered at cost by system service companies.
The Company has an agreement with Southern Nuclear under which Southern Nuclear operates the Company’s Plant Farley and provides the following nuclear-related services are rendered to the Company at cost: general executive and advisory services, general operations, management and

II-140


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
technical services, administrative services including procurement, accounting, statistical analysis, employee relations, systems and procedures services, strategic planning and budgeting services, and other services with respect to business and operations. Costs for these services amounted to $183 million, $196 million, and $182 million, during 2009, 2008, and $162 million during 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively.
The Company jointly owns Plant Greene County with Mississippi Power. The Company has an agreement with Mississippi Power under which the Company operates Plant Greene County, and Mississippi Power reimburses the Company for its proportionate share of non-fuel expenses, which were $10.2 million in 2009, $11.1 million in 2008, and $9.8 million in 2007, and $8.6 million in 2006.2007. See Note 4 for additional information.
Southern Company’s 30% ownership interest in Alabama Fuel Products, LLC (AFP), which produced synthetic fuel, was terminated in July 2006. The Company had an agreement with an indirect subsidiary of Southern Company that provided services for AFP. Under this agreement, the Company provided certain accounting functions, including processing and paying fuel transportation invoices, and the Company was reimbursed for its expenses. Amounts billed under this agreement totaled approximately $1.2 million

II-131


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
and $58.1 million, and $56.5 million in 2008 2007, and 2006,2007, respectively. In addition, the Company purchased synthetic fuel from AFP for use at several of the Company’s plants. Synthetic fuel purchases totaled $6.2 million $462.1 million, and $446.6$462.1 million in 2008 and 2007, and 2006, respectively. The synthetic fuel purchases and related party transactions were terminated as of December 31, 2007.
The Company had an agreement with Southern Power under which the Company operated and maintained Plant Harris at cost. On August 1, 2007, that agreement was terminated and replaced with a service agreement under which the Company provides to Southern Power specifically requested services. In 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006,2007, the Company billed Southern Power $0.9 million, $2.4$0.9 million, and $2.2$2.4 million, respectively, under these agreements. Under a power purchase agreement (PPA) with Southern Power, the Company’s purchased power costs from Plant Harris in 2009, 2008, and 2007 and 2006 totaled $61.6 million, $63.2 million, $66.3 million, and $61.7$66.3 million, respectively. The Company also provides the fuel, at cost, associated with the PPA and thePPA. The fuel cost recognized by the Company was $62.5 million in 2009, $119.6 million in 2008, and $108.1 million in 2007, and $77.8 million in 2006.2007. Additionally, the Company recorded $8.3 million of prepaid capacity expenses included in other deferred charges and other assets in the balance sheets at December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007 and 2006.2007. See Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters” and Note 7 under “Purchased Power Commitments” for additional information.
Also, see Note 4 for information regarding the Company’s ownership in and PPA with Southern Electric Generating Company (SEGCO).
In the second quarter, Southern Power sold a turbine rotor assembly to the Company for approximately $8.2 million. In October 2008, the Company also sold a rotor to Southern Power for approximately $6.3 million and sold a distance piece component to Gulf Power for approximately $0.3 million. In the fourth quarter, the Company purchased from SEGCO two 230kV transmission lines. The purchase price for the transmission line facilities was approximately $3.9 million. These affiliate transactions were made in accordance with FERC and Alabama PSC rules and guidelines.
The traditional operating companies, including the Company, and Southern Power jointly enter into various types of wholesale energy, natural gas, and certain other contracts, either directly or through SCS as agent. Each participating company may be jointly and severally liable for the obligations incurred under these agreements. See Note 7 under “Fuel Commitments” for additional information.
Regulatory Assets and Liabilities
The Company is subject to the provisions of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Statement No. 71, “Accountingin accounting for the Effectseffects of Certain Types of Regulation” (SFAS No. 71).rate regulation. Regulatory assets represent probable future revenues associated with certain costs that are expected to be recovered from customers through the ratemaking process. Regulatory liabilities represent probable future reductions in revenues associated with amounts that are expected to be credited to customers through the ratemaking process.

II-141


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Regulatory assets and (liabilities) reflected in the balance sheets at December 31 relate to:
            
             2009 2008 Note
 2008 2007 Note  
 (in millions)  (in millions)
 
Deferred income tax charges $363 $347  (a) $387 $363  (a)
Loss on reacquired debt 80 87  (b) 74 80  (b)
Vacation pay 53 50  (c) 54 53 (c, k) 
Under recovered regulatory clause revenues 335 314  (d)
Under/(over) recovered regulatory clause revenues  (166) 335  (d)
Fuel-hedging (realized and unrealized) losses 95 6  (e) 45 95  (e)
Other assets 7 6  (d) 8 7  (f, g)
Asset retirement obligations 18  (150)  (a)  (43) 18  (a)
Other cost of removal obligations  (635)  (614)  (a)  (668)  (635)  (a)
Deferred income tax credits  (90)  (94)  (a)  (89)  (90)  (a)
Fuel-hedging (realized and unrealized) gains  (4)  (5)  (e)  (1)  (4)  (e)
Mine reclamation and remediation  (14)  (14)  (d)  (12)  (14)  (h)
Nuclear outage  (8) 2  (d)  (27)  (8)  (d)
Deferred purchased power  (20)  (20)  (d)  (8)  (20)  (g)
Natural disaster reserve (future storms)  (33)  (26)  (d)
Natural disaster reserve  (75)  (33)  (i)
Other liabilities  (4)  (3)  (d)  (3)  (4)  (d)
Overfunded retiree benefit plans   (423)  (f)
Underfunded retiree benefit plans 614 138  (f) 657 614  (j, k)
Total assets (liabilities), net $757 $(399)  $133 $757 
Note: The recovery and amortization periods for these regulatory assets and (liabilities) are as follows:
 
(a) Asset retirement and removal assets and liabilities are recorded, deferred income tax assets are recovered, and deferred tax liabilities are amortized over the related property lives, which may range up to 50 years. Asset retirement and removal assets and liabilities will be settled and trued up following completion of the related activities.
 
(b) Recovered over the remaining life of the original issue, which may range up to 50 years.
 
(c) Recorded as earned by employees and recovered as paid, generally within one year. This includes both vacation and banked holiday pay.

II-132


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
(d) Recorded and recovered or amortized as approved or accepted by the Alabama PSC.PSC over periods not exceeding five years.
 
(e) Fuel-hedging assets and liabilities are recorded over the life of the underlying hedged purchase contracts, which generally does not exceed twothree years. Upon final settlement, actual costs incurred are recovered through the fuel cost recovery clauses.clause.
 
(f)Recorded as accepted by the Alabama PSC. Capitalized upon initialization of related construction projects.
(g)Recovered over the life of the PPA for periods up to 13 years.
(h)Recorded as accepted by the Alabama PSC. Mine reclamation and remediation liabilities will be settled following completion of the related activities.
(i)Recovered as storm restoration expenses are incurred, as approved by the Alabama PSC.
(j) Recovered and amortized over the average remaining service period which may range up to 14 years. See Note 2 for additional information.
(k)Not earning a return as offset in rate base by a corresponding asset or liability.
In the event that a portion of the Company’s operations is no longer subject to the provisions of SFAS No. 71,applicable accounting rules for rate regulation, the Company would be required to write off or reclassify to accumulated other comprehensive income related regulatory assets and liabilities that are not specifically recoverable through regulated rates. In addition, the Company would be required to determine if any impairment to other assets, including plant, exists and write down the assets if impaired, to their fair values. All regulatory assets and liabilities are to be reflected in rates. See Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters” for additional information.
Revenues
Energy and other revenues are recognized as services are provided. Wholesale capacity revenues are generally recognized on a levelized basis over the appropriate contract periods. Unbilled revenues are accrued at the end of each fiscal period. Electric rates for the Company include provisions to adjust billings for fluctuations in fuel costs, fuel hedging, the energy component of purchased power costs, and certain other costs. Revenues are adjusted for differences between these actual costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Under or over recovered regulatory clause revenues are recorded in the balance sheets and are recovered or returned to customers through adjustments to the billing factors. The Company continuously monitors the under/over recovered balances and files for revised rates as required or when management deems appropriate, depending on the rate. See Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Fuel Cost Recovery” and “Retail Regulatory Matters — Rate CNP” for additional information.
The Company has a diversified base of customers. No single customer comprises 10% or more of revenues. For all periods presented, uncollectible accounts averaged less than one percent1% of revenues.

II-142


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Fuel Costs
Fuel costs are expensed as the fuel is used. Fuel expense includes the cost of purchased emissionemissions allowances as they are used. Fuel expense also includes the amortization of the cost of nuclear fuel and a charge, based on nuclear generation, for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel. See Note 3 under “Nuclear Fuel Disposal Costs” for additional information.
Income and Other Taxes
The Company uses the liability method of accounting for deferred income taxes and provides deferred income taxes for all significant income tax temporary differences. Investment tax credits utilized are deferred and amortized to income over the average life of the related property. Taxes that are collected from customers on behalf of governmental agencies to be remitted to these agencies are presented net on the statements of income.
In accordance with FASB Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertaintyaccounting standards related to the uncertainty in Income Taxes” (FIN 48),income taxes, the Company recognizes tax positions that are “more likely than not” of being sustained upon examination by the appropriate taxing authorities. See Note 5 under “Unrecognized Tax Benefits” for additional information.
Property, Plant, and Equipment
Property, plant, and equipment is stated at original cost less regulatory disallowances and impairments. Original cost includes: materials; labor; minor items of property; appropriate administrative and general costs; payroll-related costs such as taxes, pensions, and other benefits; and the interest capitalized and/or cost of funds used during construction.

II-133


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The Company’s property, plant, and equipment consisted of the following at December 31:
        
         2009 2008 
 2008 2007  
 (in millions) (in millions)
Generation $9,096 $8,541  $9,627 $9,096 
Transmission 2,559 2,435  2,702 2,559 
Distribution 4,827 4,586  5,046 4,827 
General 1,141 1,095  1,187 1,141 
Plant acquisition adjustment 12 12  12 12 
Total plant in service $17,635 $16,669  $18,574 $17,635 
The cost of replacements of property, exclusive of minor items of property, is capitalized. The cost of maintenance, repairs, and replacement of minor items of property is charged to maintenance expense as incurred or performed with the exception of nuclear refueling costs, which are recorded in accordance with specific Alabama PSC orders. The Company accrues estimated nuclear refueling outage costs in advance of the unit’s next refueling outage. The refueling cycle is 18 months for each unit. During 2008,2009, the Company accrued $39.4$47.5 million for the applicable refueling cycles and paid $28.5$29.6 million for an outage at Plant Farley Unit 2.1. There was no outage at Plant Farley Unit 2 in 2009. At December 31, 2008,2009, the reserve balance totaled $8.7$27.1 million and is included in the balance sheet in other regulatory liabilities.
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation of the original cost of utility plant in service is provided primarily by using composite straight-line rates, which approximated 3.2% in 2009 and 2008 and 3.1% in 2007 and 2006.2007. Depreciation studies are conducted periodically to update the composite rates and the information is provided to the Alabama PSC and approved by the FERC.PSC. When property subject to depreciation is retired or otherwise disposed of in the normal course of business, its original cost, together with the cost of removal, less salvage, is charged to accumulated depreciation. For other property dispositions, the applicable cost and accumulated depreciation is removed from the balance sheet accounts and a gain or loss is recognized. Minor items of property included in the original cost of the plant are retired when the related property unit is retired.

II-143


NOTES (continued)
Alabama PowerOn June 25, 2009, the Company submitted an offer of settlement and stipulation to the FERC relating to the 2008 Annual Report
depreciation study that was filed in October 2008. The settlement offer withdraws the requests for authorization to use updated depreciation rates. In lieu of the new rates, the Company is using those depreciation rates employed prior and up to January 1, 2009 that were previously approved by the FERC. On September 30, 2009, the FERC issued an order approving the settlement offer.
Asset Retirement Obligations and Other Costs of Removal
Asset retirement obligations are computed as the present value of the ultimate costs for an asset’s future retirement and are recorded in the period in which the liability is incurred. The costs are capitalized as part of the related long-lived asset and depreciated over the asset’s useful life. The Company has received accounting guidance from the Alabama PSC allowing the continued accrual of other future retirement costs for long-lived assets that the Company does not have a legal obligation to retire. Accordingly, the accumulated removal costs for these obligations will continue to beare reflected in the balance sheets as a regulatory liability.
The liability recognized to retire long-lived assets primarily relates to the Company’s nuclear facility, Plant Farley. The fair value of assets legally restricted for settling retirement obligations related to nuclear facilities as of December 31, 20082009 was $404$490 million. In addition, the Company has retirement obligations related to various landfill sites and underground storage tanks, asbestos removal, and disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls in certain transformers. The Company also has identified retirement obligations related to certain transmission and distribution facilities and certain wireless communication towers. However, liabilities for the removal of these assets have not been recorded because the range of time over which the Company may settle these obligations is unknown and cannot be reasonably estimated. The Company will continue to recognize in the statements of income allowed removal costs in accordance with its regulatory treatment. Any differences between costs recognized under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 143, “Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations”in accordance with accounting standards related to asset retirement and FASB Interpretation No. 47, “Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations”environmental obligations, and those reflected in rates are recognized as either a regulatory asset or liability, as ordered by the Alabama PSC, and are reflected in the balance sheets. See “Nuclear Decommissioning” for further information on amounts included in rates.

II-134


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Details of the asset retirement obligations included in the balance sheets are as follows:
        
         2009 2008
 2008 2007  
 (in millions) (in millions)
Balance beginning of year $506 $476  $461 $506 
Liabilities incurred      
Liabilities settled  (2)  (3)  (1)  (2)
Accretion 31 33  31 31 
Cash flow revisions(a)
  (74)     (74)
Balance end of year $461 $506  $491 $461 
(a) Updated based on results from 2008 Nuclear Decommissioning Study
Nuclear Decommissioning
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requires licensees of commercial nuclear power reactors to establish a plan for providing reasonable assurance of funds for future decommissioning. The Company has an external trust fundfunds (the Fund)Funds) to comply with the NRC’s regulations. Use of the FundFunds is restricted to nuclear decommissioning activities and the Fund isFunds are managed and invested in accordance with applicable requirements of various regulatory bodies, including the NRC, the FERC, and the Alabama PSC, as well as the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The Fund is investedFunds are required to be held by one or more trustees with an individual net worth of at least $100 million. The FERC requires the Funds’ managers to exercise the standard of care in investing that a tax-efficient manner“prudent investor” would use in a diversified mixthe same circumstances. The FERC regulations also require, except for investments tied to market indices or other mutual funds, that the Funds’ managers may not invest in any securities of equity and fixed income securities and are reported as of December 31, 2008 as trading securities pursuant to FASB Statement No. 115, “Accountingthe utility for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities” (SFAS No. 115).
On January 1, 2008,which it manages funds or its affiliates. While the Company adopted FASB Statement No. 159, “Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities — Includingis allowed to prescribe an Amendment of FASB Statement No. 115” (SFAS No. 159). This standard permits an entityoverall investment policy to choosethe Funds’ managers, the Company is not allowed to measure many financial instruments and certain other items at fair value. The Company elected the fair value option only for investment securities heldengage in the Fund. The Fund is included in the balance sheets at fair value, as disclosed in Note 10.
Management elected to continue to record the Fund at fair value becauseday-to-day management believes that fair value best represents the nature of the Fund. Management has delegated day-to-dayFunds or to mandate individual investment decisions. Day-to-day management of the investments in the FundFunds is delegated to unrelated third party managers with oversight by Companythe Company’s management. The Funds’ managers of the Fund are authorized, within broad limits, to actively buy and sell securities at their own discretion in order to maximize the investment return on the FundFunds’ investments. BecauseThe Funds are invested in a tax-efficient manner in a diversified mix of the Company’s inability to choose to holdequity and fixed income securities that have experienced unrealized losses until recovery of their value, all unrealized losses incurred during 2006 and 2007, prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 159, were considered other-than-temporary impairments under SFAS No. 115.

II-144


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
are reported as trading securities.
The adoption of SFAS No. 159 had no impact onCompany records the results of operations, cash flows, or financial condition ofinvestment securities held in the Company. For all periods presented, all gainsFunds at fair value, as disclosed in Note 10. Gains and losses, whether realized, unrealized, or identified as other-than-temporary, have been and will continue to beare recorded in the regulatory liability for asset retirement obligations in the balance sheets and are not included in net income or other comprehensive income. Fair value adjustments, realized gains, and other-than-temporary impairment losses are determined on a specific identification basis.
At December 31, 2009, investment securities in the Funds totaled $488.4 million consisting of equity securities of $345.6 million, debt securities of $134.3 million, and $8.5 million of other securities. At December 31, 2008, investment securities in the FundFunds totaled $402.9 million consisting of equity securities of $256.7 million, debt securities of $135.3 million, and $10.9 million of other securities. These amounts exclude receivables related to investment income and pending investment sales, and payables related to pending investment purchases.
At December 31, 2007, investment securities in the Fund totaled $542.8 million consisting of equity securities of $385.4 million, debt securities of $140.2 million, and $17.2 million of other securities. Unrealized gains were $130.8 million for equity securities, $7.0 million debt securities, and $0.1 million for other securities. Other-than-temporary impairments were $(15.7) million for equity securities and $(3.5) million for debt securities.
Sales of the securities held in the FundFunds resulted in cash proceeds of $243.8 million, $299.6 million, and $333.4 million in 2009, 2008, and $285.7 million, in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively, all of which were re-invested.reinvested. For 2009, fair value increases, including reinvested interest and dividends and excluding the Funds’ expenses, were $96.2 million, of which $79.9 million related to securities held in the Funds at December 31, 2009. For 2008, fair value reductions, including reinvested interest and dividends and excluding the Funds’ expenses, were $134.4 million, of which $107.6 million related to securities held in the Fund at December 31, 2008.$(134.4) million. Realized gains and other-than-temporary impairment losses were $34.6 million and $37.2$(37.2) million, respectively, in 2007 and $22.0 million and $18.2 million, respectively, in 2006.2007. While the investment securities held in the FundFunds are reported as trading securities, from the perspective of SFAS No. 115, the Fund continuesFunds continue to be managed with a long-term focus. Accordingly, all purchases and sales within the FundFunds are presented separately in the statements of cash flows as investing cash flows, consistent with the nature of and purpose for which the securities were acquired.
Amounts previously recorded in internal reserves are being transferred into the external trust funds over periods approved by the Alabama PSC. The NRC’s minimum external funding requirements are based on a generic estimate of the cost to decommission only the radioactive portions of a nuclear unit based on the size and type of reactor. The Company has filed a plan with the NRC designed to ensure that, over time, the deposits and earnings of the external trust funds will provide the minimum funding amounts prescribed by the NRC.

II-135


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
At December 31, 2008,2009, the accumulated provisions for decommissioning were as follows:
    
     (in millions)
 (in millions)
External trust funds $404  $490 
Internal reserves 26  25 
Total $430  $515 
Site study cost is the estimate to decommission the facility as of the site study year. The estimated costs of decommissioning based on the most current study performed in 2008 for Plant Farley was as follows:
     
Decommissioning periods:    
Beginning year  2037 
Completion year  2065 
 
     
  (in millions)
Site study costs:    
Radiated structures $1,060 
Non-radiated structures  72 
 
Total $1,132 
 
The decommissioning cost estimates are based on prompt dismantlement and removal of the plant from service. The actual decommissioning costs may vary from the above estimates because of changes in the assumed date of decommissioning, changes in NRC requirements, or changes in the assumptions used in making these estimates.
For ratemaking purposes, the Company’s decommissioning costs are based on the site study. Significant assumptions used to determine these costs for ratemaking were an inflation rate of 4.5% and a trust earnings rate of 7.0%.

II-145


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The next site study is expected to be conducted in 2013.
Amounts previously contributed to the external trust fund are currently projected to be adequate to meet the decommissioning obligations. The Company will continue to provide site specific estimates of the decommissioning costs and related projections of funds in the external trust to the Alabama PSC and, if necessary, would seek the Alabama PSC’s approval to address any changes in a manner consistent with the NRC and other applicable requirements. The Company continues to transfer internal reserves (less than $1 million annually) previously collected from customers prior to the establishment of the external trust.
Allowance for Funds Used During Construction (AFUDC)
In accordance with regulatory treatment, the Company records AFUDC, which represents the estimated debt and equity costs of capital funds that are necessary to finance the construction of new regulated facilities. While cash is not realized currently from such allowance, it increases the revenue requirement over the service life of the plant through a higher rate base and higher depreciation expense. The equity component of AFUDC is not included in calculating taxable income. All current construction costs are included in retail rates. The composite rate used to determine the amount of AFUDC was 9.2% in 2009 and 2008 and 9.4% in 2007, and 8.8% in 2006.2007. AFUDC, net of income tax, as a percent of net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock was 14.9% in 2009, 9.4% in 2008, and 8.0% in 2007, and 4.5% in 2006.2007.
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets and Intangibles
The Company evaluates long-lived assets for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of such assets may not be recoverable. The determination of whether an impairment has occurred is based on either a specific regulatory disallowance or an estimate of undiscounted future cash flows attributable to the assets, as compared with the carrying value of the assets. If an impairment has occurred, the amount of the impairment recognized is determined by either the amount of regulatory disallowance or by estimating the fair value of the assets and recording a loss if the carrying value is greater than the fair value. For assets identified as held for sale, the carrying value is compared to the estimated fair value less the cost to sell in order to determine if an impairment loss is required. Until the assets are disposed of, their estimated fair value is re-evaluated when circumstances or events change.

II-136


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Natural Disaster Reserve
In accordance withBased on an order from the Alabama PSC, order, the Company has establishedmaintains a natural disaster reserve (NDR)for operations and maintenance expense to cover the cost of uninsured damages from major storms to its transmission and distribution facilities. The Company is authorizedorder approves a separate monthly natural disaster reserve (NDR) charge to collect a monthly NDR charge per account that consistscustomers consisting of two components which began on January 1, 2006.components. The first component is intended to establish and maintain a target reserve balance of $75 million for future storms and is an on-going part of customer billing. This plan has a target reserve balance of $75 million that could be achieved within three years assuming the Company experiences no additional storms. The second component of the NDR charge is intended to allow recovery of any existing deferred hurricane relatedstorm-related operations and maintenance costs and any future reserve deficits over a 24-month period. The Alabama PSC order gives the Company authority to haverecord a negativedeficit balance in the NDR balance when costs of uninsured storm damage exceed any established NDRreserve balance. Absent further Alabama PSC approval, the maximum total NDR charge consisting of both components is $10 per month per account for non-residential customerscustomer account and $5 per month per account for residential customers.customer account. The Company has discretionary authority to accrue certain additional amounts as circumstances warrant.
At December 31, 2008,In addition to the monthly NDR charge, the Company hadaccrued $39.6 million of discretionary reserve in 2009 resulting in an accumulated a balance of $33.2approximately $75 million in the target reserve for future storms whichas of December 31, 2009. This reserve is included in other regulatory liabilities, deferred in the balance sheets under “Other Regulatory Liabilities.” In June 2007,sheets. Effective February 2010, billings will be reduced to $0.37 per month per non-residential customer account and $0.15 per month per residential customer account, consistent with the Alabama PSC order to maintain the target NDR balance. The Company has fully recovered its priordeferred storm cost of $51.3 million resulting from Hurricanes Dennis and Katrina. As a result, customercosts; therefore, rates decreased by this portiondo not include the second component of the NDR charge effective July 1, 2007.charge.
As revenue from the NDR charge is recognized, an equal amount of operations and maintenance expenseexpenses related to the NDR will also be recognized. As a result, this increaseany change in revenue and expense will not have an impacteffect on net income but will increase annualdecrease operating cash flow.flows related to the NDR charge in 2010 when compared to 2009.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
For purposes of the financial statements, temporary cash investments are considered cash equivalents. Temporary cash investments are securities with original maturities of 90 days or less.

II-146


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Materials and Supplies
Generally, materials and supplies include the average cost of transmission, distribution, and generating plant materials. Materials are charged to inventory when purchased and then expensed or capitalized to plant, as appropriate, at weighted average cost when installed.
Fuel Inventory
Fuel inventory includes the average costs of oil, coal, natural gas, and emissionemissions allowances. Fuel is charged to inventory when purchased and then expensed as used and recovered by the Company through fuel cost recovery rates approved by the Alabama PSC. EmissionEmissions allowances granted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are included in inventory at zero cost.
Financial Instruments
The Company uses derivative financial instruments to limit exposure to fluctuations in interest rates, the prices of certain fuel purchases, and electricity purchases and sales. All derivative financial instruments are recognized as either assets or liabilities (categorized(included in “Other” or shown separately as “Risk Management Activities”) and are measured at fair value. See Note 10 for additional information. Substantially all of the Company’s bulk energy purchases and sales contracts that meet the definition of a derivative are exempt from fair value accounting requirements and are accounted for under the accrual method. Other derivative contracts qualify as cash flow hedges of anticipated transactions or are recoverable through the Alabama PSC-approved fuel hedging program. This results in the deferral of related gains and losses in other comprehensive income or regulatory assets and liabilities, respectively, until the hedged transactions occur. Any ineffectiveness arising from cash flow hedges is recognized currently in net income. Other derivative contracts are marked to market through current period income and are recorded on a net basis in the statements of income. See Note 6 under “Financial Instruments”11 for additional information.
The Company does not offset fair value amounts recognized for multiple derivative instruments executed with the same counterparty under a master netting arrangement. Additionally, the Company has no outstanding collateral repayment obligations or rights to reclaim collateral arising from derivative instruments recognized at December 31, 2008.2009.

II-137


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The Company is exposed to losses related to financial instruments in the event of counterparties’ nonperformance. The Company has established controls to determine and monitor the creditworthiness of counterparties in order to mitigate the Company’s exposure to counterparty credit risk.
The Company’s other financial instruments for which the carrying amounts did not equal fair values at December 31 were as follows:
         
  Carrying Amount Fair Value
  (in millions)
Long-term debt:        
2008
 $5,855  $5,784 
2007  5,160   5,079 
The fair values were based on either closing market prices (Level 1) or closing prices of comparable instruments (Level 2). See Note 10 for all other items recognized at fair value in the financial statements.
Comprehensive Income
The objective of comprehensive income is to report a measure of all changes in common stock equity of an enterprise that result from transactions and other economic events of the period other than transactions with owners. Comprehensive income consists of net income, changes in the fair value of qualifying cash flow hedges, and prior to the adoption of SFAS No.158, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans” (SFAS No. 158), the minimum pension liability, less income taxes and reclassifications for amounts included in net income.
Variable Interest Entities
The primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity must consolidate the related assets and liabilities. The Company has established certain wholly-owned trusts to issue preferred securities. See Note 6 under “Long-Term Debt Payable to Affiliated Trusts” for additional information. However, the Company is not considered the primary beneficiary of the trusts. Therefore, the investments in

II-147


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
these trusts are reflected as Other Investments, and the related loans from the trusts are included in Long-term Debt in the balance sheets.
Investments
The Company maintains an investment in a debt security that matures in 2018 and is classified as available-for-sale. This security is included in the balance sheets under Other Property and Investments-Other and totaled $0.4 million and $2.3 million at December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Because the interest rate resets weekly, the carrying value approximates the fair market value.
2. RETIREMENT BENEFITS
The Company has a defined benefit, trusteed, pension plan covering substantially all employees. The plan is funded in accordance with requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (ERISA). No contributions to the defined benefit plan are expected for the year ending December 31, 2009.2010. The Company also provides certain defined benefit pension plans for a selected group of management and highly compensated employees. Benefits under these non-qualified pension plans are funded on a cash basis. In addition, the Company provides certain medical care and life insurance benefits for retired employees through other postretirement benefit plans. The Company funds trusts to the extent required by the Alabama PSC and the FERC. For the year ending December 31, 2009,2010, postretirement trust contributions are expected to total approximately $17.2$11 million.
The measurement date for plan assets and obligations for 2009 and 2008 was December 31 while the measurement date for prior years was September 30. Pursuant to SFAS No. 158,accounting standards related to defined postretirement benefit plans, the Company was required to change the measurement date for its defined postretirement benefit postretirement plans from September 30 to December 31 beginning with the year ended December 31, 2008. As permitted, the Company adopted the measurement date provisions of SFAS No. 158 effective January 1, 2008 resulting in an increase in long-term liabilities of approximately $5 million and an increase in prepaid pension costs of approximately $11 million.
Pension Plans
The total accumulated benefit obligation for the pension plans was $1.6 billion in 2009 and $1.4 billion in 2008 and $1.3 billion in 2007.2008. Changes during the plan year ended December 31, 2009 and the 15-month period ended December 31, 2008 and 12-month period ended September 30, 2007 in the projected benefit obligations and the fair value of plan assets were as follows:
        
         2009 2008
 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
 
Change in benefit obligation
  
Benefit obligation at beginning of year $1,420 $1,394  $1,460 $1,420 
Service cost 43 35  34 43 
Interest cost 109 82  96 109 
Benefits paid  (94)  (70)  (77)  (94)
Plan amendments  10 
Actuarial (gain) loss  (18)  (31)
Actuarial loss (gain) 162  (18)
Balance at end of year 1,460 1,420  1,675 1,460 
  
Change in plan assets
  
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year 2,318 2,038  1,539 2,318 
Actual return (loss) on plan assets  (692) 346  245  (692)
Employer contributions 7 4  5 7 
Benefits paid  (94)  (70)  (77)  (94)
Fair value of plan assets at end of year 1,539 2,318  1,712 1,539 
Funded status at end of year 79 898 
Fourth quarter contributions  2 
Prepaid pension asset, net $79 $900  $37 $79 

II-148II-138


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
At December 31, 2008,2009, the projected benefit obligations for the qualified and non-qualified pension plans were $1.4$1.6 billion and $87$95 million, respectively. All pension plan assets are related to the qualified pension plan.
Pension plan assets are managed and invested in accordance with all applicable requirements, including ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Internal Revenue Code). In 2009, in determining the optimal asset allocation for the pension fund, the Company performed an extensive study based on projections of both assets and liabilities over a 10-year horizon. The primary goal of the study was to maximize plan funded status. The Company’s investment policy covers a diversified mix of assets, including equity and fixed income securities, real estate, and private equity. Derivative instruments are used primarily as hedging tools but may also be used to gain efficient exposure to the various asset classes.classes and as hedging tools. The Company primarily minimizes the risk of large losses primarily through diversification but also monitors and manages other aspects of risk. The actual composition of the Company’s pension plan assets as of the end of the year, along with the targeted mix of assets, is presented below:
                        
 Target 2008 2007 Target 2009 2008
Domestic equity  36%  34%  38%  29%  33%  34%
International equity 24 23 24  28 29 23 
Fixed income 15 14 15  15 15 14 
Real estate 15 19 16 
Special situations 3   
Real estate investments 15 13 19 
Private equity 10 10 7  10 10 10 
Total  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%
The investment strategy for plan assets related to the Company’s defined benefit pension plan is to be broadly diversified across major asset classes. The asset allocation is established after consideration of various factors that affect the assets and liabilities of the pension plan including, but not limited to, historical and expected returns, volatility, correlations of asset classes, the current level of assets and liabilities, and the assumed growth in assets and liabilities. Because a significant portion of the liability of the pension plan is long-term in nature, the assets are invested consistent with long-term investment expectations for return and risk. To manage the actual asset class exposures relative to the target asset allocation, the Company employs a formal rebalancing program. As additional risk management, external investment managers and service providers are subject to written guidelines to ensure appropriate and prudent investment practices.
Detailed below is a description of the investment strategies for each major asset category disclosed above:
Domestic equity.This portion of the portfolio comprises a mix of large and small capitalization stocks with generally an equal distribution of value and growth attributes managed both actively and through passive index approaches.
International equity.This portion of the portfolio is actively managed with a blend of growth stocks and value stocks with both developed and emerging market exposure.
Fixed income.This portion of the portfolio is actively managed through an allocation to long-dated, investment grade corporate and government bonds.
Special situations.Though currently unfunded, this portion of the portfolio was established both to execute opportunistic investment strategies with the objectives of diversifying and enhancing returns and exploiting short-term inefficiencies, as well as to invest in promising new strategies of a longer-term nature.
Real estate investments.Assets in this portion of the portfolio are invested in traditional private market, equity-oriented investments in real properties (indirectly through pooled funds or partnerships) and in publicly traded real estate securities.
Private equity.This portion of the portfolio generally consists of investments in private partnerships that invest in private or public securities typically through privately negotiated and/or structured transactions. Leveraged buyouts, venture capital, and distressed debt are examples of investment strategies within this category.

II-139


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The fair values of pension plan assets as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 are presented below. These fair value measurements exclude cash, receivables related to investment income, pending investments sales, and payables related to pending investment purchases.
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using  
  Quoted Prices      
  in Active Significant    
  Markets for Other Significant  
  Identical Observable Unobservable  
  Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2009: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
 
  (in millions)
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $339  $141  $  $480 
International equity*  439   44      483 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     127      127 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     34      34 
Corporate bonds     85      85 
Pooled funds     3      3 
Cash equivalents and other  1   104      105 
Special situations            
Real estate investments  53      166   219 
Private equity        169   169 
 
Total $832  $538  $335  $1,705 
 
Liabilities:                
Derivatives  (1)        (1)
 
Total $831  $538  $335  $1,704 
 
*Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using  
  Quoted Prices      
  in Active Significant    
  Markets for Other Significant  
  Identical Observable Unobservable  
  Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2008: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
 
  (in millions)
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $318  $129  $  $447 
International equity*  285   26      311 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     133      133 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     63      63 
Corporate bonds     86      86 
Pooled funds     1      1 
Cash equivalents and other  7   61      68 
Special situations            
Real estate investments  43      254   297 
Private equity        148   148 
 
Total $653  $499  $402  $1,554 
 
Liabilities:                
Derivatives  (2)        (2)
 
Total $651  $499  $402  $1,552 
 
*Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.

II-140


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Changes in the fair value measurement of the Level 3 items in the pension plan assets valued using significant unobservable inputs for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:
                 
  2009 2008
  Real Estate     Real Estate  
  Investments Private Equity Investments Private Equity
 
  (in millions)
Beginning balance $254  $148  $316  $157 
Actual return on investments:                
Related to investments held at year end  (72)  13   (51)  (43)
Related to investments sold during the year  (20)  3   1   8 
 
Total return on investments  (92)  16   (50)  (35)
Purchases, sales, and settlements  4   5   (12)  26 
Transfers into/out of Level 3            
 
Ending balance $166  $169  $254  $148 
 
The fair values presented above are prepared in accordance with applicable accounting standards regarding fair value. For purposes of determining the fair value of the pension plan assets and the appropriate level designation, management relies on information provided by the plan’s trustee. This information is reviewed and evaluated by management with changes made to the trustee information as appropriate.
Securities for which the activity is observable on an active market or traded exchange are categorized as Level 1. Fixed income securities classified as Level 2 are valued using matrix pricing, a common model using observable inputs. Domestic and international equity securities classified as Level 2 consist of pooled funds where the value is not quoted on an exchange but where the value is determined using observable inputs from the market. Securities that are valued using unobservable inputs are classified as Level 3 and include investments in real estate and investments in limited partnerships. The Company invests (through the pension plan trustee) directly in the limited partnerships which then invest in various types of funds or various private entities within a fund. The fair value of the limited partnerships’ investments is based on audited annual capital accounts statements which are generally prepared on a fair value basis. The Company also relies on the fact that, in most instances, the underlying assets held by the limited partnerships are reported at fair value. External investment managers typically send valuations to both the custodian and to the Company within 90 days of quarter end. The custodian reports the most recent value available and adjusts the value for cash flows since the statement date for each respective fund.
Amounts recognized in the consolidated balance sheets related to the Company’s pension plans consist of:
         
  2008 2007
  (in millions)
Prepaid pension asset $166  $989 
Other regulatory assets  479   43 
Current liabilities, other  (6)  (5)
Other regulatory liabilities     (423)
Employee benefit obligations  (81)  (84)
         
  2009 2008
 
  (in millions)
Prepaid pension costs $133  $166 
Other regulatory assets, deferred  549   479 
Other current liabilities  (6)  (6)
Employee benefit obligations  (90)  (81)
 
Presented below are the amounts included in regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities at December 31, 20082009 and 20072008 related to the defined benefit pension plans that had not yet been recognized in net periodic pension cost along with the estimated amortization of such amounts for 2009:2010.
         
  Prior Service Cost Net(Gain)Loss
  (in millions)
         
Balance at December 31, 2008:
        
Regulatory assets $58  $421 
Regulatory liabilities      
 
Total $58  $421 
 
         
Balance at December 31, 2007:
        
Regulatory assets $14  $29 
Regulatory liabilities  56   (479)
 
Total $70  $(450)
 
         
Estimated amortization in net periodic pension cost in 2009:
        
Regulatory assets $9  $1 
Regulatory liabilities      
 
Total $9  $1 
 
         
  Prior ServiceCost Net(Gain)Loss
 
  (in millions)
 
Balance at December 31, 2009:
        
Regulatory assets $50  $499 
 
         
Balance at December 31, 2008:
        
Regulatory assets $58  $421 
 
         
Estimated amortization in net periodic pension cost in 2010:
        
Regulatory assets $9  $2 
 

II-149II-141


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
The changes in the balances of regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities related to the defined benefit pension plans for the 15-month periodyear ended December 31, 20082009 and the 12-month period15 months ended September 30, 2007December 31, 2008 are presented in the following table:
                
 Regulatory Regulatory Regulatory Regulatory
 Assets Liabilities Assets Liabilities
 (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2006
 $36 $(183)
Net (gain) loss 1  (232)
Change in prior service costs 10  
Reclassification adjustments: 
Amortization of prior service costs  (2)  (8)
Amortization of net gain  (2)  
Total reclassification adjustments  (4)  (8)
Total change 7  (240)
 (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2007
 43  (423) $43 $(423)
Net (gain) loss 441 433 
Net loss 441 433 
Change in prior service costs      
Reclassification adjustments:  
Amortization of prior service costs  (2)  (10)  (2)  (10)
Amortization of net gain  (3)    (3)  
Total reclassification adjustments  (5)  (10)  (5)  (10)
Total change 436 423  436 423 
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $479 $  479  
Net loss 79  
Change in prior service costs 1  
Reclassification adjustments: 
Amortization of prior service costs  (9)  
Amortization of net gain  (1)  
Total reclassification adjustments  (10)  
Total change 70  
Balance at December 31, 2009
 $549 $ 
Components of net periodic pension cost (income) were as follows:
            
             2009 2008 2007
 2008 2007 2006
 (in millions) (in millions)
Service cost $35 $35 $37  $34 $35 $35 
Interest cost 87 82 77  96 87 82 
Expected return on plan assets  (160)  (146)  (139)  (164)  (160)  (146)
Recognized net (gain) loss 2 2 3  1 2 2 
Net amortization 10 10 9  9 10 10 
Net periodic pension (income) $(26) $(17) $(13) $(24) $(26) $(17)
Net periodic pension cost (income) is the sum of service cost, interest cost, and other costs netted against the expected return on plan assets. The expected return on plan assets is determined by multiplying the expected rate of return on plan assets and the market-related value of plan assets. In determining the market-related value of plan assets, the Company has elected to amortize changes in the market value of all plan assets over five years rather than recognize the changes immediately. As a result, the accounting value of plan assets that is used to calculate the expected return on plan assets differs from the current fair value of the plan assets.
Future benefit payments reflect expected future service and are estimated based on assumptions used to measure the projected benefit obligation for the pension plans. At December 31, 2008,2009, estimated benefit payments were as follows:
        
 Benefit Payments Benefit Payments
 (in millions)
2009 $81 
 (in millions)
2010 84  $87 
2011 88  91 
2012 92  95 
2013 96  101 
2014 to 2018 556 
2014 108 
2015 to 2019 610 

II-150II-142


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Other Postretirement Benefits
Changes during the plan year ended December 31, 2009 and the 15-month period ended December 31, 2008 and the 12-month period ended September 30, 2007 in the accumulated postretirement benefit obligations (APBO) and in the fair value of plan assets were as follows:
        
         2009 2008
 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
Change in benefit obligation
  
Benefit obligation at beginning of year $480 $490  $446 $480 
Service cost 9 7  6 9 
Interest cost 37 28  29 37 
Benefits paid  (30)  (23)  (26)  (30)
Actuarial (gain) loss  (53)  (24)
Actuarial loss (gain) 19  (53)
Plan amendments  (15)  
Retiree drug subsidy 3 2  2 3 
Balance at end of year 446 480  461 446 
 
Change in plan assets
  
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year 297 259  252 297 
Actual return (loss) on plan assets  (75) 36  47  (75)
Employer contributions 57 23  20 57 
Benefits paid  (27)  (21)  (24)  (27)
Fair value of plan assets at end of year 252 297  295 252 
Funded status at end of year  (194)  (183)
Fourth quarter contributions  28 
Accrued liability (recognized in the balance sheet) $(166) $(194)
Accrued liability $(194) $(155)
Other postretirement benefit plan assets are managed and invested in accordance with all applicable requirements, including ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code. The Company’s investment policy covers a diversified mix of assets, including equity and fixed income securities, real estate, and private equity. Derivative instruments are used primarily as hedging tools but may also be used to gain efficient exposure to the various asset classes.classes and as hedging tools. The Company primarily minimizes the risk of large losses primarily through diversification but also monitors and manages other aspects of risk. The actual composition of the Company’s other postretirement benefit plan assets as of the end of the year, along with the targeted mix of assets, is presented below:
            
             Target 2009 2008
 Target 2008 2007
Domestic equity  49%  31%  46%  47%  42%  31%
International equity 12 13 15  12 16 13 
Fixed income 31 46 29 
Real estate 5 7 7 
Domestic fixed income 32 35 46 
Special situations 1   
Real estate investments 5 4 7 
Private equity 3 3 3  3 3 3 
Total  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%
Detailed below is a description of the investment strategies for each major asset category disclosed above:
Domestic equity.This portion of the portfolio comprises a mix of large and small capitalization stocks with generally an equal distribution of value and growth attributes managed both actively and through passive index approaches.
International equity.This portion of the portfolio is actively managed with a blend of growth stocks and value stocks with both developed and emerging market exposure.
Fixed income.This portion of the portfolio is comprised of domestic bonds.
Special situations.Though currently unfunded, this portion of the portfolio was established both to execute opportunistic investment strategies with the objectives of diversifying and enhancing returns and exploiting short-term inefficiencies, as well as to invest in promising new strategies of a longer-term nature.
Trust-owned life insurance.Some of the Company’s taxable trusts invest in these investments in order to minimize the impact of taxes on the portfolio.
Real estate investments.Assets in this portion of the portfolio are invested in traditional private market, equity-oriented investments in real properties (indirectly through pooled funds or partnerships) and in publicly traded real estate securities.

II-143


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Private equity.This portion of the portfolio generally consists of investments in private partnerships that invest in private or public securities typically through privately negotiated and/or structured transactions. Leveraged buyouts, venture capital, and distressed debt are examples of investment strategies within this category.
The fair values of other postretirement benefit plan assets as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 are presented below. These fair value measurements exclude cash, receivables related to investment income, pending investments sales, and payables related to pending investment purchases.
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using  
  Quoted Prices      
  in Active Significant    
  Markets for Other Significant  
  Identical Observable Unobservable  
  Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2009: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
 
  (in millions)
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $54  $8  $  $62 
International equity*  24   2      26 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     7      7 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     2      2 
Corporate bonds     5      5 
Pooled funds            
Cash equivalents and other     23      23 
Trust-owned life insurance     144      144 
Special situations            
Real estate investments  3      9   12 
Private equity        10   10 
 
Total $81  $191  $19  $291 
 
*Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using  
  Quoted Prices      
  in Active Significant    
  Markets for Other Significant  
  Identical Observable Unobservable  
  Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2008: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
 
  (in millions)
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $33  $7  $  $40 
International equity*  16   1      17 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     7      7 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     4      4 
Corporate bonds     5      5 
Pooled funds            
Cash equivalents and other     48      48 
Trust-owned life insurance     105      105 
Special situations            
Real estate investments  2      15   17 
Private equity        8   8 
 
Total $51  $177  $23  $251 
 
*Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.

II-144


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Changes in the fair value measurement of the Level 3 items in the other postretirement benefit plan assets valued using significant unobservable inputs for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:
                 
  2009 2008
  Real Estate     Real Estate  
  Investments Private Equity Investments Private Equity
 
  (in millions)
Beginning balance $15  $8  $17  $9 
Actual return on investments:                
Related to investments held at year end  (5)  2   (2)  (2)
Related to investments sold during the year  (1)         
 
Total return on investments  (6)  2   (2)  (2)
Purchases, sales, and settlements           1 
Transfers into/out of Level 3            
 
Ending balance $9  $10  $15  $8 
 
The fair values presented above are prepared in accordance with applicable accounting standards regarding fair value. For purposes of determining the fair value of the pension plan assets and the appropriate level designation, management relies on information provided by the plan’s trustee. This information is reviewed and evaluated by management with changes made to the trustee information as appropriate.
Securities for which the activity is observable on an active market or traded exchange are categorized as Level 1. Fixed income securities classified as Level 2 are valued using matrix pricing, a common model using observable inputs. Domestic and international equity securities classified as Level 2 consist of pooled funds where the value is not quoted on an exchange but where the value is determined using observable inputs from the market. Securities that are valued using unobservable inputs are classified as Level 3 and include investments in real estate and investments in limited partnerships. The Company invests (through the pension plan trustee) directly in the limited partnerships which then invest in various types of funds or various private entities within a fund. The fair value of the limited partnerships’ investments is based on audited annual capital accounts statements which are generally prepared on a fair value basis. The Company also relies on the fact that, in most instances, the underlying assets held by the limited partnerships are reported at fair value. External investment managers typically send valuations to both the custodian and to the Company within 90 days of quarter end. The custodian reports the most recent value available and adjusts the value for cash flows since the statement date for each respective fund.
Amounts recognized in the balance sheets related to the Company’s other postretirement benefit plans consist of:
         
  2008 2007
  (in millions)
Regulatory assets $135  $95 
Employee benefit obligations  (194)  (155)
 

II-151


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
         
  2009 2008
 
  (in millions)
Regulatory assets $108  $135 
Employee benefit obligations  (166)  (194)
 
Presented below are the amounts included in regulatory assets at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008 related to the other postretirement benefit plans that had not yet been recognized in net periodic postretirement benefit cost along with the estimated amortization of such amounts for 2009.2010.
                        
 Prior Service Net Transition Prior Service Net Transition
 Cost (Gain)Loss Obligation
 (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2009:
 
Regulatory asset $33 $67 $8 
 Cost (Gain) Loss Obligation
 (in millions) 
Balance at December 31, 2008:
  
Regulatory asset $49 $71 $15  $49 $71 $15 
  
Balance at December 31, 2007:
 
Estimated amortization as net periodic postretirement cost in 2010:
 
Regulatory asset $55 $20 $20  $4 $ $3 
 
Estimated amortization as net periodic postretirement cost in 2009:
 
Regulatory asset $4 $ $4 

II-145


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The changechanges in the balance of regulatory assets related to the other postretirement benefit plans for the 15-month periodplan year ended December 31, 20082009 and the 12-month period15 months ended September 30, 2007December 31, 2008 are presented in the following table:
        
 Regulatory Assets Regulatory Assets
 (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2006
 $147 
Net gain  (41)
Change in prior service costs  
Reclassification adjustments: 
Amortization of transition obligation  (4)
Amortization of prior service costs  (5)
Amortization of net gain  (2)
Total reclassification adjustments  (11)
Total change  (52)
 (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2007
 95  $95 
Net loss 50  50 
Change in prior service costs  
Change in prior service costs/transition obligation  
Reclassification adjustments:  
Amortization of transition obligation  (5)  (5)
Amortization of prior service costs  (5)  (5)
Amortization of net gain    
Total reclassification adjustments  (10)  (10)
Total change 40  40 
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $135  135 
Net gain  (4)
Change in prior service costs/transition obligation  (15)
Reclassification adjustments: 
Amortization of transition obligation  (4)
Amortization of prior service costs  (4)
Amortization of net gain  
Total reclassification adjustments  (8)
Total change  (27)
Balance at December 31, 2009
 $108 
Components of the other postretirement benefit plans’ net periodic cost were as follows:
            
             2009 2008 2007
 2008 2007 2006
 (in millions) (in millions)
Service cost $7 $7 $7  $6 $7 $7 
Interest cost 29 28 26  29 29 28 
Expected return on plan assets  (22)  (19)  (17)  (24)  (22)  (19)
Net amortization 9 11 12  8 9 11 
Net postretirement cost $23 $27 $28  $19 $23 $27 
The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Medicare Act) provides a 28% prescription drug subsidy for Medicare eligible retirees. The effect of the subsidy reduced the Company’s expenses for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007 by approximately $10.7$9.0 million, $10.7 million, and $11.1$10.7 million, respectively.

II-152


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
respectively, and is expected to have a similar impact on future expenses.
Future benefit payments, including prescription drug benefits, reflect expected future service and are estimated based on assumptions used to measure the APBO for the postretirement plans. Estimated benefit payments are reduced by drug subsidy receipts expected as a result of the Medicare Act as follows:
                        
 Benefit Payments Subsidy Receipts Total Benefit Payments Subsidy Receipts Total
 (in millions)
2009 $28 $(3) $25 
 (in millions)
2010 31  (3) 28  $29 $(3) $26 
2011 33  (4) 29  32  (3) 29 
2012 35  (4) 31  34  (3) 31 
2013 36  (5) 31  36  (4) 32 
2014 to 2018 196  (30) 166 
2014 37  (4) 33 
2015 to 2019 194  (28) 166 

II-146


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Actuarial Assumptions
The weighted average rates assumed in the actuarial calculations used to determine both the benefit obligations as of the measurement date and the net periodic costs for the pension and other postretirement benefit plans for the following year are presented below. Net periodic benefit costs were calculated in 20052006 for the 20062007 plan year using a discount rate of 5.50%6.00% and an annual salary increase of 3.50%.
             
  2008 2007 2006
 
Discount  6.75%  6.30%  6.00%
Annual salary increase  3.75   3.75   3.50 
Long-term return on plan assets  8.50   8.50   8.50 
 
             
  2009 2008 2007
 
Discount rate:            
Pension plans  5.93%  6.75%  6.30%
Other postretirement benefit plans  5.84   6.75   6.30 
Annual salary increase  4.18   3.75   3.75 
Long-term return on plan assets:            
Pension plans  8.50   8.50   8.50 
Other postretirement benefit plans  7.52   7.66   7.68 
 
The Company determinedestimates the long-termexpected rate of return on pension plan and other postretirement benefit plan assets using a financial model to project the expected return on each current investment portfolio. The analysis projects an expected rate of return on each of seven different asset classes in order to arrive at the expected return on the entire portfolio relying on each trust’s target asset allocation and reasonable capital market assumptions. The financial model is based on historicalfour key inputs: anticipated returns by asset class returns(based in part on historical returns), each trust’s asset allocation, an anticipated inflation rate, and current market conditions, taking into account the diversification benefitsprojected impact of investing in multiple asset classes.a periodic rebalancing of each trust’s portfolio.
An additional assumption used in measuring the APBO was a weighted average medical care cost trend rate of 9.15%8.50% for 2009,2010, decreasing gradually to 5.50%5.25% through the year 2015,2016 and remaining at that level thereafter. An annual increase or decrease in the assumed medical care cost trend rate of 1% would affect the APBO and the service and interest cost components at December 31, 20082009 as follows:
                
 1 Percent 1 Percent 1 Percent 1 Percent
 Increase Decrease Increase Decrease
 (in millions) (in millions)
Benefit obligation $31 $33  $29 $27 
Service and interest costs 2 2  2 2 
Employee Savings Plan
The Company also sponsors a 401(k) defined contribution plan covering substantially all employees. The Company provides an 85% matching contribution up to 6% of an employee’s base salary. Prior to November 2006, the Company matched employee contributions at a rate of 75% up to 6% of the employee’s base salary. Total matching contributions made to the plan for 2009, 2008, and 2007 and 2006 were $19 million, $18 million, $17 million, and $14$17 million, respectively.
3. CONTINGENCIES AND REGULATORY MATTERS
General Litigation Matters
The Company is subject to certain claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. In addition, the Company’s business activities are subject to extensive governmental regulation related to public health and the environment.environment such as regulation of air emissions and water discharges. Litigation over environmental issues and claims of various types, including property damage, personal injury, common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of environmental requirements such as opacity and air and water quality standards, has increased generally throughout the United States. In particular, personal injury and other claims for damages caused by alleged exposure to hazardous materials, and common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas and other emissions, have become more frequent. The ultimate outcome of such pending or potential litigation against the Company cannot be predicted at this time; however, for current proceedings not specifically reported herein, management does not anticipate that the liabilities, if any, arising from such current proceedings would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial statements.

II-153II-147


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Environmental Matters
New Source Review Actions
In November 1999, the EPA brought a civil action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, including the Company, alleging that itthese subsidiaries had violated the New Source Review (NSR) provisions of the Clean Air Act and related state laws at certain coal-fired generating facilities. Through subsequent amendments and other legal procedures,These actions were filed concurrently with the issuance of notices of violation of the NSR provisions to each of the traditional operating companies. After the Company was dismissed from the original action, the EPA filed a separate action in January 2001 against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama afterAlabama. In the lawsuit against the Company, was dismissed from the original action. In this lawsuit, the EPA allegedalleges that NSR violations occurred at five coal-fired generating facilities operated by the Company. The civil action requests penalties and injunctive relief, including an order requiring the installation of the best available control technology at the affected units. The original action, now solely against Georgia Power, has been administratively closed since the spring of 2001, and the case has not been reopened.
In June 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama entered a consent decree between the Company and the EPA, resolving a portion of the Company’s lawsuit relating to the alleged NSR violations at Plant Miller. The consent decree required the Company to pay $100,000 to resolve the government’s claim for a civil penalty and to donate $4.9 million of sulfur dioxide emission allowances to a nonprofit charitable organization. It also formalized specific emissions reductions to be accomplished by the Company, consistent with other Clean Air Act programs that require emissions reductions. In August 2006, the district court in Alabama granted the Company’s motion for summary judgment and entered final judgment in favor of the Company on the EPA’s claims related to all of the remaining plants: Plants Barry, Gaston, Gorgas, and Greene County.
The plaintiffs appealed the district court’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, where the appeal was stayed, pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in a similar case against Duke Energy. The Supreme Court issued its decision in the Duke Energy case in April 2007, and in December 2007, the Eleventh Circuit vacated the district court’s decision in the Company’s case and remanded the case back to the district court for consideration of the legal issues in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Duke Energy case. On July 24, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama granted partial summary judgment in favor of the Company with respect to its other affected units regarding the proper legal test for determining whether projects are routine maintenance, repair, and replacement and therefore are excluded from NSR permitting. The decision did not resolve the case, and the ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.which remains ongoing.
The Company believes that it complied with applicable laws and the EPA regulations and interpretations in effect at the time the work in question took place. The Clean Air Act authorizes maximum civil penalties of $25,000 to $37,500 per day, per violation at each generating unit, depending on the date of the alleged violation. An adverse outcome in this matter could require substantial capital expenditures or affect the timing of currently budgeted capital expenditures that cannot be determined at this time and could possibly require payment of substantial penalties. Such expenditures could affect future results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.
Carbon Dioxide Litigation
New York Case
In July 2004, three environmental groups and attorneys general from eight states, each outside of Southern Company’s service territory, and the corporation counsel for New York City filed complaints in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against Southern Company and four other electric power companies. The complaints allege that the companies’ emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, contribute to global warming, which the plaintiffs assert is a public nuisance. Under common law public and private nuisance theories, the plaintiffs seek a judicial order (1) holding each defendant jointly and severally liable for creating, contributing to, and/or maintaining global warming and (2) requiring each of the defendants to cap its emissions of carbon dioxide and then reduce those emissions by a specified percentage each year for at least a decade. The plaintiffs have not, however, requested that damages be awarded in connection with their claims. Southern Company believes these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. In September 2005, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted Southern Company’s and the other defendants’ motions to dismiss these cases. The plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in October 2005 but no decision has been issued. Theand, on September 21, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the district court’s ruling, vacating the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claim, and remanding the case to the district court. On November 5, 2009, the defendants, including Southern Company, sought rehearing en banc, and the court’s ruling is subject to potential appeal. Therefore, the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.

II-154


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Kivalina Case
OnIn February 26, 2008, the Native Village of Kivalina and the City of Kivalina filed a suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against several electric utilities (including Southern Company), several oil companies, and a coal company. The plaintiffs are the governing bodies of an Inupiat village in Alaska. The plaintiffs contend that the village is being destroyed by erosion allegedly caused by global warming that the plaintiffs attribute to emissions of greenhouse gases by the defendants. The plaintiffs assert claims for public and private nuisance and contend that some of the defendants have acted in concert and are therefore jointly and severally liable for the plaintiffs’ damages. The suit seeks damages for lost property values and for the cost of relocating the village, which is alleged to be $95 million to $400 million. On June 30, 2008, all defendants filed motions to dismiss this case. Southern Company believes that these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. On September 30, 2009, the U.S. District Court for the

II-148


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Northern District of California granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss the case based on lack of jurisdiction and ruled the claims were barred by the political question doctrine and by the plaintiffs’ failure to establish the standard for determining that the defendants’ conduct caused the injury alleged. On November 5, 2009, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit challenging the district court’s order dismissing the case. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Other Litigation
Common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas emissions have become more frequent, and courts have recently determined that private parties and states have standing to bring such claims. For example, on October 16, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi’s dismissal of private party claims against certain oil, coal, chemical, and utility companies alleging damages as a result of Hurricane Katrina. In reversing the dismissal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that plaintiffs have standing to assert their nuisance, trespass, and negligence claims and none of these claims are barred by the political question doctrine. The Company is not currently a party to this litigation but was named as a defendant in an amended complaint which was rendered moot in August 2007 by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi when such court dismissed the original matter. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Environmental Remediation
The Company must comply with other environmental laws and regulations that cover the handling and disposal of waste and releases of hazardous substances. Under these various laws and regulations, the Company may also incur substantial costs to clean up properties. The Company has received authority from the Alabama PSC to recover approved environmental compliance costs through a specific retail rate clause that is adjusted annually. See “Retail Regulatory Matters — Rate CNP” herein for additional information.
FERC Matters
Market-Based Rate Authority
The Company has authorization from the FERC to sell power to non-affiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices. Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based contract with an affiliate.
In December 2004, the FERC initiated a proceeding to assess Southern Company’s generation dominancemarket power within its retail service territory. The ability to charge market-based rates in other markets iswas not an issue in the proceeding. Any new market-based rate sales by the Company in Southern Company’s retail service territory entered into during a 15-month refund period that ended in May 2006 could behave been subject to refund to a cost-based rate level.
In November 2007, the presiding administrative law judge issued an initial decision regarding the methodology to be used in the generation dominance tests. The proceedings are ongoing. The ultimate outcome of this generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined, but an adverse decision byOn December 23, 2009, Southern Company and the FERC trial staff reached an agreement in a final order couldprinciple that would resolve the proceeding in its entirety. The agreement does not reflect any finding or suggestion that the Company possesses or has exercised any market power. The agreement likewise does not require the Company to charge cost-based rates for certain wholesalemake any refunds related to sales during the 15-month refund period. Under the agreement, the Company will donate $0.6 million to nonprofit organizations in the Southern CompanyState of Alabama for the purpose of offsetting the electricity bills of low-income retail service territory, which may be lower than negotiated market-based rates, and could also result in total refunds of up to $3.9 million, plus interest.customers. The Company believes that thereagreement is no meritorious basis for an adverse decision in this proceeding and is vigorously defending itself in this matter.
In June 2007, the FERC issued its final rule in Order No. 697 regarding market-based rate authority. The FERC generally retained its current market-based rate standards. Responding to a number of requests for rehearing, the FERC issued Order No. 697-A on April 21, 2008 and Order No. 697-B on December 12, 2008. These orders largely affirmed the FERC’s prior revision and codification of the regulations governing market-based rates for public utilities. In accordance with the orders, Southern Company submitted to the FERC an updated market power analysis on September 2, 2008 related to its continued market-based rate authority. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
On October 17, 2008, Southern Company filed with the FERC a revised market-based rate (MBR) tariff and a new cost-based rate (CBR) tariff. The revised MBR tariff provides for a “must offer” energy auction whereby Southern Company offers all of its available energy for sale in a day-ahead auction and an hour-ahead auction with reserve prices not to exceed the CBR tariff price, after considering Southern Company’s native load requirements, reliability obligations, and sales commitments to third parties. All sales under the energy auction would be at market clearing prices established under the auction rules. The new CBR tariff provides for a cost-based price for wholesale sales of less than a year. On December 18, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the MBR tariff subject to certain revisions toreview and approval by the auction proposal. On January 21, 2009, Southern Company made a compliance filing that accepted all the conditions of the MBR tariff order. When this order becomes final, Southern Company will have 30 days to implement the wholesale auction. On December 31, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the CBR tariff subject to providing additional information concerning one aspect of the tariff. On January 30, 2009, Southern Company filed a response addressing the FERC inquiry to the CBR tariff order. Implementation of the energy auction in accordance with the MBR tariff order

II-155


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
is expected to adequately mitigate going forward any presumption of market power that Southern Company may have in the Southern Company retail service territory. The timing of when the FERC may issue the final orders on the MBR and CBR tariffs and the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.FERC.
Intercompany Interchange Contract
The Company’s generation fleet is operated under the Intercompany Interchange Contract (IIC), as approved by the FERC. In May 2005, the FERC initiated a new proceeding to examine (1) the provisions of the IIC among the traditional operating companies (including the Company), Southern Power, and SCS, as agent, under the terms of which the power pool of Southern Company is operated, (2) whether any parties to the IIC have violated the FERC’s standards of conduct applicable to utility companies that are transmission providers, and (3) whether Southern Company’s code of conduct defining Southern Power as a “system company” rather than a “marketing affiliate” is just and reasonable. In connection with the formation of Southern Power, the FERC authorized Southern Power’s inclusion in the IIC in 2000. The FERC also previously approved Southern Company’s code of conduct.
In October 2006, the FERC issued an order accepting a settlement resolving the proceeding subject to Southern Company’s agreement to accept certain modifications to the settlement’s terms andterms. Southern Company notified the FERC that it accepted the modifications. The modifications largely involve functional separation and information restrictions related to marketing activities conducted on

II-149


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
behalf of Southern Power. In November 2006, Southern Company filed with the FERC a compliance plan in connection with the order. In April 2007, the FERC approved, with certain modifications, the plan submitted by Southern Company. Implementation of the plan did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements. In November 2007, Southern Company notified the FERC that the plan had been implemented. OnIn December 12, 2008, the FERC division of audits issued for public comment its final audit report pertaining to compliance implementation and related matters. No comments were submitted challenging the audit report’s findings were submitted. Aof Southern Company’s compliance. The proceeding remains open pending a decision is now pending from the FERC.
Generation Interconnection Agreements
In November 2004, generator company subsidiaries of Tenaska, Inc. (Tenaska), as counterparties to two previously executed interconnection agreements withFERC regarding the Company, filed complaints at the FERC requesting that the FERC modify the agreements and that the Company refund a total of $11 million previously paid for interconnection facilities. No other similar complaints are pending with the FERC.
In January 2007, the FERC issued an order granting Tenaska’s requested relief. Although the FERC’s order required the modification of Tenaska’s interconnection agreements, under the provisions of the order, the Company determined that no refund was payable to Tenaska. The Company requested rehearing asserting that the FERC retroactively applied a new principle to existing interconnection agreements. Tenaska requested rehearing of FERC’s methodology for determining the amount of refunds. The requested rehearings were denied and the Company and Tenaska have appealed the orders to the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia. The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
Retail Regulatory Matters
The following retail ratemaking procedures will remain in effect until the Alabama PSC votes to modify or discontinue them.
Rate RSE
The Alabama PSC has adopted a Rate Stabilization and Equalization plan (Rate RSE) that provides for periodic annual adjustments based upon the Company’s earned return on retail common equity. Retail rates remain unchanged when the retail return on common equity ranges between 13.0% and 14.5%. In October 2005, the Alabama PSC approved a revision to Rate RSE. Effective January 2007 and thereafter, Rate RSE adjustments are made based on forward-looking information for the applicable upcoming calendar year. Rate adjustments for any two-year period, when averaged together, cannot exceed 4.0% per year and any annual adjustment is limited to 5.0%. Prior to January 2007, annual adjustments were limited to 3.0%. Retail rates remain unchanged when the return on retail common equity is projected to be between 13.0% and 14.5%. If the Company’s actual retail return on common equity is above the allowed equity return range, customer refunds will be required; however, there is no provision for additional customer billings should the actual retail return on common equity fall below the allowed equity return range. The Rate RSE increase for 2008 was 3.24% or $147 million annually and was effective in January 2008.

II-156


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
On October 7, 2008, the Alabama PSC approved a corrective rate package primarily providing for adjustments associated with customer charges to certain existing rate structures. This package, effective in January 2009, is expected to generate additional annual revenues of approximately $168 million. The Company agreed to a moratorium on any increase in rates in 2009 under Rate RSE. On December 1, 2008, the Company made its submission of projected data for calendar year 2009.
Rate CNP
The Company’s retail rates, approved by the Alabama PSC, provide for adjustments to recognize the placing of new generating facilities into retail service and the recovery of retail costs associated with certificated PPAs under a Rate Certificated New Plant (Rate CNP). In April 2006, an annual adjustment to Rate CNP increased retail rates by approximately 0.5% or $19 million annually. There was no rate adjustment associated with the annual true-up adjustment in April 2007 and 2008. There will be no adjustment to the current Rate CNP to recover certificated PPA costs in April 2009.
Rate CNP also allows for the recovery of the Company’s retail costs associated with environmental laws, regulations, or other such mandates. The rate mechanism is based on forward looking information and provides for the recovery of these costs pursuant to a factor that is calculated annually. Environmental costs to be recovered include operations and maintenance expenses, depreciation, and a return on invested capital. Retail rates increased due to environmental costs approximately 1.2% in January 2006, 0.6% in January 2007, and 2.4% in January 2008. On October 7, 2008, the Company agreed to defer collection during 2009 of any increase in rates under the portion of Rate CNP, which permits recovery of costs associated with environmental laws and regulations until 2010. The deferral of the retail rate adjustments will have an immaterial impact on annual cash flows, and will have no significant effect on the Company’s revenues or net income. On December 1, 2008, the Company made its submission of projected data for calendar year 2009.
Fuel Cost Recovery
The Company has established fuel cost recovery rates under an energy cost recovery clause (Rate ECR) approved by the Alabama PSC. Rates are based on an estimate of future energy costs and the current over or under recovered balance. The Company, along with the Alabama PSC, will continue to monitor the under recovered fuel cost balance to determine whether an additional adjustment to billing rates is required.
In June 2007, the Alabama PSC ordered the Company to increase its Rate ECR factor to 3.100 cents per kilowatt-hour (KWH) effective with billings beginning July 2007 for the 30-month period ending December 2009. The previous rate of 2.400 cents per KWH had been in effect since January 2006. This increase was intended to permit recovery of energy costs based on an estimate of future energy cost, as well as the collection of the existing under recovered energy cost by the end of 2009. During the recovery period, the Company was allowed to include a carrying charge associated with the under recovered fuel costs in the fuel expense calculation. In the event the application of this increased Rate ECR factor results in an over recovered position during this period, the Company would pay interest on any such over recovered balance at the same rate used to derive the carrying cost.
On October 7, 2008, the Alabama PSC approved an increase in the Company’s Rate ECR factor to 3.983 cents per KWH for a 24-month period beginning with October 9, 2008 billings. Thereafter, the Rate ECR factor is 5.910 cents per KWH, absent a contrary order by the Alabama PSC. The previous rate of 3.100 cents per KWH had been in effect since July 2007. Rate ECR revenues, as recorded on the financial statements, are adjusted for the difference in actual recoverable costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. During the 24-month period, the Company will be allowed to continue to include a carrying charge associated with the under recovered fuel costs in the fuel expense calculation. In the event the application of this increased Rate ECR factor results in an over recovered position during this period, the Company will pay interest on any such over recovered balance at the same rate used to derive the carrying cost.
The Company’s under recovered fuel costs as of December 31, 2008 totaled $305.8 million as compared to $279.8 million at December 31, 2007. As a result of the Alabama PSC orders, the Company classified $180.9 million and $81.7 million of the under recovered regulatory clause revenues as deferred charges and other assets in the balance sheets as of December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007, respectively. This classification is based on an estimate which includes such factors as weather, generation availability, energy demand, and the price of energy. A change in any of these factors could have a material impact on the timing of the recovery of the under recovered fuel costs.

II-157


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Natural Disaster Cost Recovery
Based on an order by the Alabama PSC, the Company maintains a reserve for operations and maintenance expenses to cover the cost of damages from major storms to its transmission and distribution facilities.
In December 2005, the Alabama PSC approved a request by the Company to replenish the depleted NDR due to the hurricanes in 2005 and allow for recovery of future natural disaster costs. The Alabama PSC order gives the Company authority to record a deficit balance in the NDR when costs of uninsured storm damage exceed any established reserve balance. The order also approved a separate monthly NDR charge consisting of two components which began in January 2006. The first component is intended to establish and maintain a target reserve balance of $75 million for future storms and is an on-going part of customer billing. The Company currently expects that the target reserve balance could be achieved within three years. The second component of the NDR charge is intended to allow recovery of the existing deferred hurricane related operations and maintenance costs and any future reserve deficits over a 24-month period. Absent further Alabama PSC approval, the maximum total NDR charge consisting of both components is $10 per month per non-residential customer account and $5 per month per residential customer account.
At December 31, 2008, the Company had an accumulated balance of $33.2 million in the target reserve for future storms, which is included in the balance sheets under “Other Regulatory Liabilities.” In June 2007, the Company fully recovered its storm cost of $51.3 million resulting from previous hurricanes. As a result, customer rates decreased by this portion of the NDR charge effective in July 2007.
As revenue from the NDR charge is recognized, an equal amount of operations and maintenance expense related to the NDR will also be recognized. As a result, this increase in revenue and expense will not have an impact on net income, but will increase annual cash flow.audit report.
Nuclear Fuel Disposal Costs
The Company has a contract with the United States, acting through the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), that provides for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel. The DOE failed to begin disposing of spent nuclear fuel in 1998 as required by the contract, and the Company is pursuing legal remedies against the government for breach of contract.
In July 2007, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims awarded the Company approximately $17 million, representing substantially all of the direct costs of the expansion of spent nuclear fuel storage facilities at Plant Farley from 1998 through 2004. In JulyNovember 2007, the government filed agovernment’s motion for reconsideration which was denied in November 2007. Ondenied. In January 2, 2008, the government filed an appeal, and onin February 29, 2008, filed a motion to stay the appeal. OnIn April 1, 2008, the courtU.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted the government’s motion to stay the appeal pending the court’s decisions in three other similar cases already on appeal. Those cases were decided in August 2008. Based onThe U.S. Court of Appeals for the rulingsFederal Circuit has left the stay of appeals in those cases,place pending the decision in an appeal is expected to proceed in first quarter 2009.of another case involving spent nuclear fuel contracts.
OnIn April 3, 2008, a second claim against the government was filed for damages incurred after December 31, 2004 (the court-mandated cut-off in the original claim), due to the government’s alleged continuing breach of contract. OnIn October 31, 2008, the courtU.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a similar request by the government to stay this proceeding. The complaint does not contain any specific dollar amount for recovery of damages. Damages will continue to accumulate until the issue is resolved or the storage is provided. No amounts have been recognized in the financial statements as of December 31, 20082009 for either claim. The final outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time, but no material impact on net income is expected as any damage amounts collected from the government are expected to be returned to customers.
An on-site dry spent fuel storage facility at Plant Farley is operational and can be expanded to accommodate spent fuel through the expected life of the plant.
Retail Regulatory Matters
Rate RSE
Rate RSE adjustments are based on forward-looking information for the applicable upcoming calendar year. Rate adjustments for any two-year period, when averaged together, cannot exceed 4.0% per year and any annual adjustment is limited to 5.0%. Retail rates remain unchanged when the retail return on common equity is projected to be between 13.0% and 14.5%. If the Company’s actual retail return on common equity is above the allowed equity return range, customer refunds will be required; however, there is no provision for additional customer billings should the actual retail return on common equity fall below the allowed equity return range.
In October 2008, the Alabama PSC approved a corrective rate package, effective January 2009, that primarily provides for adjustments associated with customer charges to certain existing rate structures. The Company agreed to a moratorium on any increase in rates in 2009 under the Rate RSE.
On December 1, 2009, the Company made its Rate RSE submission to the Alabama PSC of projected data for calendar year 2010. The Rate RSE increase for 2010 is 3.24%, or $152 million annually, and was effective in January 2010. The revenue adjustment under the Rate RSE is largely attributable to the costs associated with fossil capacity which is currently dedicated to certain long-term wholesale contracts that expire during 2010. Retail cost of service for 2010 reflects the costs for that portion of the year in which this capacity is no longer committed to wholesale. In an Alabama PSC order dated January 5, 2010, the Alabama PSC acknowledged that a full calendar year of costs for these units would be reflected in the Rate RSE calculation beginning in 2011 and thereafter. Under the terms of Rate RSE, the maximum increase for 2011 cannot exceed 4.76%.

II-150


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Rate CNP
The Company’s retail rates, approved by the Alabama PSC, provide for adjustments to recognize the placing of new generating facilities into retail service and the recovery of retail costs associated with certificated PPAs under a Rate CNP. There was no adjustment to the Rate CNP to recover certificated PPA costs in 2007, 2008, or 2009. Effective April 2010, Rate CNP will be reduced approximately $70 million annually, primarily due to the expiration on May 31, 2010, of the PPA with Southern Power covering the capacity of Plant Harris Unit 1.
Rate CNP also allows for the recovery of the Company’s retail costs associated with environmental laws, regulations, or other such mandates. The rate mechanism is based on forward looking information and provides for the recovery of these costs pursuant to a factor that is calculated annually. Environmental costs to be recovered include operations and maintenance expenses, depreciation, and a return on invested capital. Retail rates increased approximately 0.6% in January 2007 and 2.4% in January 2008 due to environmental costs. In October 2008, the Company agreed to defer collection of any increase in rates under this portion of Rate CNP, which permits recovery of costs associated with environmental laws and regulations, from 2009 until 2010. The deferral of the retail rate adjustments had an immaterial impact on annual cash flows, and had no significant effect on the Company’s revenues or net income. On December 1, 2009, the Company made its Rate CNP environmental submission of projected data for calendar year 2010, resulting in an increase to retail rates of approximately 4.3%, or an additional $195 million annually, based upon projected billings. Under the terms of the rate mechanism, this adjustment became effective in January 2010. The Rate CNP environmental adjustment is primarily attributable to scrubbers being placed in service during 2010 at four of the Company’s generating units.
Fuel Cost Recovery
The Company has established fuel cost recovery rates under Rate ECR approved by the Alabama PSC. Rates are based on an estimate of future energy costs and the current over or under recovered balance. The Company, along with the Alabama PSC, will continue to monitor the over recovered fuel cost balance to determine whether an additional adjustment to billing rates is required.
In June 2007, the Alabama PSC ordered the Company to increase its Rate ECR factor to 3.100 cents per kilowatt-hour (KWH) effective with billings beginning July 2007. In October 2008, the Alabama PSC approved an increase in the Company’s Rate ECR factor to 3.983 cents per KWH effective with billings beginning October 2008.
On June 2, 2009, the Alabama PSC approved a decrease in the Company’s Rate ECR factor to 3.733 cents per KWH for billings beginning June 9, 2009. On December 1, 2009, the Alabama PSC approved a decrease in the Company’s Rate ECR factor to 2.731 cents per KWH for billings beginning January 2010 through December 2011. The Alabama PSC further approved an additional reduction in the Rate ECR factor of 0.328 cents per KWH for the billing months of January 2010 through December 2010 resulting in a Rate ECR factor of 2.403 cents per KWH for such 12-month period. For billing months beginning January 2012, the Rate ECR factor shall be 5.910 cents per KWH, absent a contrary order by the Alabama PSC. Rate ECR revenues, as recorded on the financial statements, are adjusted for the difference in actual recoverable fuel costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Accordingly, the approved decreases in the Rate ECR factor will have no significant effect on the Company’s net income, but will decrease operating cash flows related to fuel cost recovery in 2010 when compared to 2009.
As of December 31, 2009, the Company had an over recovered fuel balance of approximately $199.6 million, of which approximately $22.1 million is included in deferred over recovered regulatory clause revenues in the balance sheets. As of December 31, 2008, the Company had an under recovered fuel balance of approximately $305.8 million, of which approximately $180.9 million is included in deferred under recovered regulatory clause revenues in the balance sheets. These classifications are based on estimates, which include such factors as weather, generation availability, energy demand, and the price of energy. A change in any of these factors could have a material impact on the timing of any return of the over recovered fuel costs or recovery of under recovered fuel costs.
Natural Disaster Reserve
Based on an order from the Alabama PSC, the Company maintains a reserve for operations and maintenance expense to cover the cost of damages from major storms to its transmission and distribution facilities. The order approves a separate monthly NDR charge to customers consisting of two components. The first component is intended to establish and maintain a target reserve balance of $75 million for future storms and is an on-going part of customer billing. The second component of the NDR charge is intended to allow recovery of any existing deferred storm-related operations and maintenance costs and any future reserve deficits over a 24-month period. The Alabama PSC order gives the Company authority to record a deficit balance in the NDR when costs of storm damage exceed any established reserve balance. Absent further Alabama PSC approval, the maximum total NDR charge consisting of

II-151


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
both components is $10 per month per non-residential customer account and $5 per month per residential customer account. The Company has discretionary authority to accrue certain additional amounts as circumstances warrant.
In addition to the monthly NDR charge, the Company accrued $39.6 million of discretionary reserve in 2009 resulting in an accumulated balance of approximately $75 million in the reserve for future storms as of December 31, 2009. This reserve is included in other regulatory liabilities, deferred in the balance sheets. Effective February 2010, billings will be reduced to $0.37 per month per non-residential customer account and $0.15 per month per residential customer account, consistent with the Alabama PSC order to maintain the target NDR balance. The Company has fully recovered its deferred storm costs, therefore, rates do not include the second component of the NDR charge.
As revenue from the NDR charge is recognized, an equal amount of operations and maintenance expenses related to the NDR will also be recognized. As a result, any change in revenue and expense will not have an effect on net income but will decrease operating cash flows related to the NDR charge in 2010 when compared to 2009.
4. JOINT OWNERSHIP AGREEMENTS
The Company and Georgia Power own equally all of the outstanding capital stock of SEGCO, which owns electric generating units with a total rated capacity of 1,020 megawatts, as well as associated transmission facilities. The capacity of these units is sold equally to the Company and Georgia Power under a contract which, in substance, requires payments sufficient to provide for the operating expenses, taxes, interest expense, and a return on equity, whether or not SEGCO has any capacity and energy available. The term of the contract extends automatically for two-year periods, subject to either party’s right to cancel upon two years’ notice. The

II-158


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Company’s share of purchased power totaled $82.1 million in 2009, $124 million in 2008, and $105 million in 2007, and $95 million in 2006, and is included in “Purchased power from affiliates” in the statements of income. The Company accounts for SEGCO using the equity method.
In addition, the Company has guaranteed unconditionally the obligation of SEGCO under an installment sale agreement for the purchase of certain pollution control facilities at SEGCO’s generating units, pursuant to which $24.5 million principal amount of pollution control revenue bonds are outstanding. Also, the Company has guaranteed $50 million principal amount of unsecured senior notes issued by SEGCO for general corporate purposes. Georgia Power has agreed to reimburse the Company for the pro rata portion of such obligations corresponding to its then proportionate ownership of stock of SEGCO if the Company is called upon to make such payment under its guaranty.
At December 31, 2008,2009, the capitalization of SEGCO consisted of $68$85 million of equity and $74 million of long-term debt on which the annual interest requirement is $3.2 million. SEGCO paid no dividends totalingin 2009, $7.8 million in 2008, and $2.6 million in 2007, and $8.5 million in 2006, of which one-half of each was paid to the Company. In addition, the Company recognizes 50% of SEGCO’s net income.
In addition to the Company’s ownership of SEGCO, the Company’s percentage ownership and investment in jointly-owned coal-fired generating plants at December 31, 20082009 is as follows:
                                
 Total Megawatt Company Company Accumulated Total Megawatt Company Company Accumulated
Facility Capacity Ownership Investment Depreciation Capacity Ownership Investment Depreciation
 (in millions) (in millions)
Greene County 500  60.00%(1) $130 $68  500  60.00%(1) $137 $71 
Plant Miller  
Units 1 and 2 1,320  91.84%(2) 986 425  1,320  91.84%(2) 1,063 449 
(1) Jointly owned with an affiliate, Mississippi Power.
 
(2) Jointly owned with PowerSouth.
At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company’s Plant Miller portion of construction work in progress was $174.4$243.6 million.
The Company has contracted to operate and maintain the jointly owned facilities as agent for their co-owners. The Company’s proportionate share of its plant operating expenses is included in operating expenses in the statements of income and the Company is responsible for providing its own financing.

II-152


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
5. INCOME TAXES
Southern Company files a consolidated federal income tax return and combined state income tax returns for the StateStates of Alabama, Georgia, State of Mississippi, and the State of Alabama.Mississippi. Under a joint consolidated income tax allocation agreement, each subsidiary’s current and deferred tax expense is computed on a stand-alone basis and no subsidiary is allocated more expense than would be paid if it filed a separate income tax return. In accordance with IRS regulations, each company is jointly and severally liable for the tax liability. In addition, the Company files a separate company income tax return for the State of Tennessee.
Current and Deferred Income Taxes
Details of income tax provisions are as follows:
             
  2008 2007 2006
  (in millions)
Federal —            
Current $198  $287  $302 
Deferred  121   17   (25)
 
   319   304   277 
 
State —            
Current  43   43   56 
Deferred  6   4   (3)
 
   49   47   53 
 
Total $368  $351  $330 
 

II-159


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
             
  2009 2008 2007
  (in millions)
Federal —            
Current $374  $198  $287 
Deferred  (41)  121   17 
 
  $333  $319  $304 
 
State —            
Current $76  $43  $43 
Deferred  (25)  6   4 
 
   51   49   47 
 
Total $384  $368  $351 
 
The tax effects of temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and their respective tax bases, which give rise to deferred tax assets and liabilities, are as follows:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 (in millions) (in millions)
Deferred tax liabilities:  
Accelerated depreciation $1,908 $1,766  $2,010 $1,908 
Property basis differences 343 341  376 343 
Premium on reacquired debt 33 36  30 33 
Pension and other benefits 175 340  184 175 
Fuel clause under recovered 140 128   140 
Regulatory assets associated with employee benefit obligations 286 90  295 286 
Asset retirement obligations  27 
Regulatory assets associated with asset retirement obligations 199 187  208 199 
Other 67 60  82 67 
Total 3,151 2,975  3,185 3,151 
Deferred tax assets:  
Federal effect of state deferred taxes 126 121  88 126 
State effect of federal deferred taxes 104 96  107 104 
Unbilled revenue 34 31  29 34 
Storm reserve 4 3  23 4 
Pension and other benefits 330 126  334 330 
Other comprehensive losses 13 10  9 13 
Regulatory liabilities associated with employee benefit obligations  178 
Fuel clause over recovered 75 
Asset retirement obligations 199 214  208 199 
Other 82 88  93 82 
Total 892 867  966 892 
Total deferred tax liabilities, net 2,259 2,108  2,219 2,259 
Portion included in current (liabilities) assets, net  (16)  (43)
Portion included in current assets (liabilities), net 74  (16)
Accumulated deferred income taxes in the balance sheets $2,243 $2,065  $2,293 $2,243 

II-153


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company’s tax-related regulatory assets and liabilities were $363$387 million and $90$89 million, respectively. These assets are attributable to tax benefits flowed through to customers in prior years, to deferred taxes previously recognized at rates lower than the current enacted tax law, and to taxes applicable to capitalized interest. These liabilities are attributable to deferred taxes previously recognized at rates higher than the current enacted tax law and to unamortized investment tax credits.
In accordance with regulatory requirements, deferred investment tax credits are amortized over the lives of the related property with such amortization normally applied as a credit to reduce depreciation in the statements of income. Credits amortized in this manner amounted to $8.0 million in each of 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006.2007. At December 31, 2008,2009, all investment tax credits available to reduce federal income taxes payable had been utilized.
Effective Tax Rate
A reconciliation of the federal statutory income tax rate to the effective income tax rate is as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
Federal statutory rate  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%
State income tax, net of federal deduction 3.1 3.2 4.0  3.0 3.1 3.2 
Non-deductible book depreciation 0.9 0.9 1.0  0.8 0.9 0.9 
Differences in prior years’ deferred and current tax rates  (0.1)  (0.2)  (0.3)  (0.2)  (0.1)  (0.2)
AFUDC-equity  (1.6)  (1.3)  (0.7)  (2.5)  (1.6)  (1.3)
Production activities deduction  (0.5)  (0.6)  (0.2)  (0.8)  (0.5)  (0.6)
Other  (0.8)  (0.7)  (0.9)  (0.2)  (0.8)  (0.7)
Effective income tax rate  36.0%  36.3%  37.9%  35.1%  36.0%  36.3%

II-160


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
AFUDC increased in 2009 due to increases in the amount of construction work in progress related to environmental mandates at generating facilities and transmission, distribution, and general plant projects compared to the prior years. See Note 1 under “Allowance for Funds Used During Construction (AFUDC)” for additional information.
The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 created a tax deduction for a portion of income attributable to U. S. production activities as defined in the Internal Revenue Code Section 199 (production activities deduction). The deduction is equal to a stated percentage of qualified production activities net income. The percentage is phased in over the years 2005 through 2010 with a 3% rate applicable to the years 2005 and 2006, a 6% rate applicable for the years 2007 through 2009, and a 9% rate thereafter. The increase from 3% in 2006 to 6% in 2007 was one of several factors that increased the Company’s 2007 deduction by $7.8 million over the 2006 deduction. The resulting additional tax benefit was approximately $3 million. The IRS has not clearly defined a methodology for calculating this deduction. However, Southern Company has agreedreached an agreement with the IRS on a calculation methodology and signed a closing agreement onin December 11, 2008. Therefore, in 2008, the Company reversed the unrecognized tax benefit related to the calculation methodology and adjusted the deduction for all previous years to conform to the agreement which resulted in a decrease in the 2008 deduction when compared to the 2007 deduction. Certain aspects of the production activities deduction remain unresolved. The net impact of the reversal of the unrecognized tax benefits combined with the application of the new methodology had no material effect on the Company’s financial statements.
Unrecognized Tax Benefits
FIN 48 requires companies to determine whether it is “more likely than not” that a tax position will be sustained upon examination by the appropriate taxing authorities before any part of the benefit can be recorded in the financial statements. It also provides guidance on the recognition, measurement, and classification of income tax uncertainties, along with any related interest and penalties. For 2008,2009, the total amount of unrecognized tax benefits decreasedincreased by $1.8$3 million, resulting in a balance of $3.0$6 million as of December 31, 2008.2009.
Changes during the year in unrecognized tax benefits were as follows:
                    
 2008 2007 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions) 
Unrecognized tax benefits at beginning of year $4.8 $1.2  $3 $5 $1 
Tax positions from current periods 0.8 1.5  2 1 2 
Tax positions from prior periods  (1.4) 2.1  1  (2)  2 
Reductions due to settlements  (1.2)     (1)   
Reductions due to expired statute of limitations       
Balance at end of year $3.0 $4.8  $6 $3 $5 
The reduction duetax positions from current periods increase for 2009 relate primarily to settlements relates to the agreement with the IRS regarding the production activities deduction methodology.tax position and other miscellaneous uncertain tax positions. The tax positions increase from prior periods for 2009 relates primarily to the production activities deduction tax position. See “Effective Tax Rate” above for additional information.

II-154


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Impact on the Company’s effective tax rate, if recognized, is as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 Change 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
Tax positions impacting the effective tax rate $3.0 $4.8 $(1.8) $6 $3 $5 
Tax positions not impacting the effective tax rate        
Balance of unrecognized tax benefits $3.0 $4.8 $(1.8) $6 $3 $5 
Accrued interest for unrecognized tax benefits:benefits was as follows:
                    
 2008 2007 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
Interest accrued at beginning of year $0.4 $  $0.3 $0.4 $ 
Interest reclassified due to settlements  (0.3)     (0.3)   
Interest accrued during the year 0.2 0.4   0.2 0.4 
Balance at end of year $0.3 $0.4  $0.3 $0.3 $0.4 
The Company classifies interest on tax uncertainties as interest expense. The Company did not accrue any penalties on uncertain tax positions.
It is reasonably possible that the amount of the unrecognized benefit with respect to a majority of the Company’s unrecognized tax positions will significantly increase or decrease within the next 12 months. The possible conclusion or settlement of federal or state audits could impact the balances significantly. At this time, an estimate of the range of reasonably possible outcomes cannot be determined.

II-161


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The IRS has audited and closed all tax returns prior to 2004. The audits for the state returns have either been concluded, or the statute of limitations has expired, for years prior to 2002.2006.
6. FINANCING
Long-Term Debt Payable to Affiliated Trusts
The Company has formed certain wholly ownedwholly-owned trust subsidiaries for the purpose of issuing preferred securities. The proceeds of the related equity investments and preferred security sales were loaned back to the Company through the issuance of junior subordinated notes totaling $206 million, which constitute substantially all of the assets of these trusts and are reflected in the balance sheets as Long-term Debt Payable. The Company considers that the mechanisms and obligations relating to the preferred securities issued for its benefit, taken together, constitute a full and unconditional guarantee by it of the respective trusts’ payment obligations with respect to these securities. At December 31, 2008,2009, preferred securities of $200 million were outstanding. See Note 1 under “Variable Interest Entities” for additional information on the accounting treatment for these trusts and the related securities.
Securities Due Within One Year
At December 31, 2009, the Company had a scheduled maturity of senior notes due within one year totaling $100 million. At December 31, 2008, the Company had scheduled maturities and redemptions of senior notes due within one year totaling $250 million. At December 31, 2007, the Company had scheduled maturities and redemptions of senior notes, and preferred stock due within one year totaling $535 million.
Maturities of senior notes through 20132014 applicable to total long-term debt are as follows: $250 million in 2009; $100 million in 2010; $200 million in 2011; $500 million in 2012; and $250 million in 2013.2013; and none in 2014.
Pollution Control Revenue Bonds
Pollution control obligations represent loans to the Company from public authorities of funds or installment purchases of solid waste disposal facilities financed by funds derived from sales by public authorities of revenue bonds. The Company is required to make payments sufficient for the authorities to meet principal and interest requirements of such bonds. The Company incurred obligations related to the issuance of $254$78.5 million of pollution control revenue bonds in 2008.2009. Proceeds from certain issuances are restricted until qualifying expenditures are incurred. During 2008, the

II-155


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company was required to purchase a total of approximately $11 million of variable rate pollution control revenue bonds that were tendered by investors, all of which were subsequently remarketed.
Also, during 2008, the Company entered into $330 million notional amount of interest rate swaps related to variable rate pollution control revenue bonds to hedge changes in interest rate for the period February 2008 through February 2010. The weighted average fixed payment rate on these hedges is 2.49% and the Company now has a total of $576 million of such hedges in place, with an overall weighted average fixed payment rate of 2.69%.2009 Annual Report
Senior Notes
The Company issued a total of $850$500 million of unsecured senior notes in 2008.2009. The proceeds of these issuances were used to repay short-term indebtedness and for other general corporate purposes.purposes, including the Company’s continuous construction program.
At December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, the Company had $4.6$4.8 billion and $4.1$4.6 billion, respectively, of senior notes outstanding. These senior notes are effectively subordinate to all secured debt of the Company which amounted to approximately $153 million at December 31, 2008.2009.
Preference and Common Stock
In 2008,2009, the Company issued no new shares of preference stock. The Company issued 7.5 million5,062,500 new shares of common stock to Southern Company at $40.00 per share and realized proceeds of $300$202.5 million. The proceeds of these issuances were used for general corporate purposes.

II-162


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Outstanding Classes of Capital Stock
The Company currently has preferred stock, Class A preferred stock, preference stock, and common stock authorized and outstanding. The Company’s preferred stock and Class A preferred stock, without preference between classes, rank senior to the Company’s preference stock and common stock with respect to payment of dividends and voluntary or involuntary dissolution. The preferred stock and Class A preferred stock of the Company contains a feature that allows the holders to elect a majority of the Company’s board of directors if dividends are not paid for four consecutive quarters. Because such a potential redemption-triggering event is not solely within the control of the Company, the preferred stock and Class A preferred stock is presented as “Redeemable Preferred Stock” in a manner consistent with temporary equity under applicable accounting standards. The preference stock does not contain such a provision that would allow the holders to elect a majority of the Company’s board. The Company’s preference stock ranks senior to the common stock with respect to the payment of dividends and voluntary or involuntary dissolution. Certain series of the preferred stock, Class A preferred stock, and preference stock are subject to redemption at the option of the Company on or after a specified date (typically 5five or 10 years after the date of issuance).
Dividend Restrictions
The Company can only pay dividends to Southern Company out of retained earnings or paid-in-capital.
Assets Subject to Lien
The Company has granted liens on certain property in connection with the issuance of certain series of pollution control revenue bonds with an outstanding principal amount of $153 million as of December 31, 2008.2009.
Bank Credit Arrangements
The Company maintains committed lines of credit in the amount of $1.3 billion, (including $582of which $481 million will expire at various times during 2010, $25 million will expire in 2011, and $765 will expire in 2012. $372 million of such lines whichthe credit facilities expiring in 2010 allow for the execution of one-year term loans. These credit facilities provide liquidity support to the Company’s commercial paper borrowings and $608 million are dedicated to funding purchase obligations relating to variable rate pollution control revenue bonds),bonds. Subsequent to December 31, 2009, two remarketings of which $466 million will expire at various times during 2009. $379 million of the credit facilities expiring in 2009 allow for the execution of one-year term loans. $765 million of credit facilities expire in 2012.pollution control revenue bonds increased that amount to $744 million.
Most of the credit arrangements require payment of a commitment fee based on the unused portion of the commitment or the maintenance of compensating balances with the banks. Commitment fees average less than one-fourth1/4 of 1% for the Company. Compensating balances are not legally restricted from withdrawal.
Most of the Company’s credit arrangements with banks have covenants that limit the Company’s debt to 65% of total capitalization, as defined in the arrangements. For purposes of calculating these covenants, long-term notes payable to affiliated trusts are excluded from debt but included in capitalization. Exceeding this debt level would result in a default under the credit arrangements. At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company was in compliance with the debt limit covenants. In addition, the credit arrangements typically contain cross default provisions that would be triggered if the Company defaulted on other indebtedness (including guarantee obligations) above a specified threshold. None of the arrangements contain material adverse change clauses at the time of borrowings.

II-156


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The Company borrows through commercial paper programs that have the liquidity support of committed bank credit arrangements. In addition, the Company borrows from time to time through uncommitted credit arrangements. As of December 31, 2009, the Company had no commercial paper outstanding. As of December 31, 2008, the Company had $25 million of commercial paper outstanding. As of December 31, 2007, the Company had no commercial paper outstanding. During 20082009 and 2007,2008, the peak amount outstanding for short-term borrowings was $301$237 million and $214$301 million, respectively. The average amount outstanding in 2009 and 2008 and 2007 was $40$30 million and $36$40 million, respectively. The average annual interest rate on short-term borrowings was 0.23% in 2008 was2009 and 2.31% and in 2007 was 5.34%.2008. Short-term borrowings are included in notes payable in the balance sheets.
At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had regulatory approval to have outstanding up to $2.0 billion of short-term borrowings.
Financial Instruments
The Company enters into energy-related derivatives to hedge exposures to electricity, gas, and other fuel price changes. However, due to cost-based rate regulations, the Company has limited exposure to market volatility in commodity fuel prices and prices of electricity. The Company manages a fuel-hedging program implemented per the guidelines of the Alabama PSC. The Company also enters into hedges of forward electricity sales.

II-163


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
At December 31, 2008, the net fair value of energy-related derivative contracts by hedge designation was reflected in the financial statements as assets/(liabilities) as follows:
         
  2008 2007
  (in millions)    
Regulatory hedges $(91.9) $(0.7)
Cash flow hedges     0.5 
Non-accounting hedges     (0.2)
 
Total fair value $(91.9) $(0.4)
 
Energy-related derivative contracts which are designated as regulatory hedges relate primarily to the Company’s fuel hedging program, where gains and losses are initially recorded as regulatory liabilities and assets, respectively, and then are included in fuel expenses as they are recovered through the fuel cost recovery clauses. Gains and losses on energy-related derivatives designated as cash flow hedges are initially deferred in other comprehensive income before being recognized in income in the same period as the hedged transactions. Gains and losses on energy-related derivative contracts that are not designated or fail to qualify as hedges are recognized in the statements of income as incurred. There was no material ineffectiveness recorded in earnings for any period presented. The Company has energy-related hedges in place up to and including 2012.
The Company also enters into derivatives to hedge exposure to changes in interest rates. Derivatives related to variable rate securities or forecasted transactions are accounted for as cash flow hedges. The derivatives employed as hedging instruments are structured to minimize ineffectiveness. As such, no material ineffectiveness has been recorded in earnings for any period presented.
At December 31, 2008, the Company had $576 million notional amount of interest rate derivatives outstanding that related to variable rate tax exempt debt, with net fair value losses of approximately $11 million as follows:
           
    Weighted   Fair Value
Notional Variable Rate Average Hedge Maturity Gain (Loss)
Amount Received Fixed Rate Paid Date December 31, 2008
        (in millions)
$576 million SIFMA
Index
 2.69%* February 2010 $(11)
 
*Hedged using the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association Municipal Swap Index (SIFMA), (formerly the Bond Market Association/PSA Municipal Swap Index)
The fair value gain or loss for cash flow hedges are recorded in other comprehensive income and are reclassified into earnings at the same time the hedged items affect earnings. In 2007 and 2006, the Company settled gains/(losses) of $(6) million, and $18 million, respectively, upon termination of certain interest derivatives at the same time it issued debt and did not incur any such settlement gains/(losses) in 2008. The effective portions of these gains/(losses) have been deferred in other comprehensive income and will be amortized to interest expense over the life of the original interest derivative, which approximates to the related underlying debt.
For the years 2008, 2007, and 2006, approximately $(3) million, $(1) million, and $10 million, respectively, of pre-tax gains/(losses) were reclassified from other comprehensive income to interest expense. For 2009, pre-tax losses of approximately $8 million are expected to be reclassified from other comprehensive income to interest expense. The Company has interest-related hedges in place through 2010 and has deferred realized gains/(losses) that are being amortized through 2035.
All derivative financial instruments are recognized as either assets or liabilities and are measured at fair value. See Note 10 for additional information.
7. COMMITMENTS
Construction Program
The Company is engaged in continuous construction programs, currently estimated to total $1.4 billion in 2009, $1.0 billion in 2010, and $1.0 billion in 2011.2011, and $1.1 billion in 2012. These amounts include $73 million, $48 million, $37and $51 million for 2010, 2011, and $45 million in 2009, 2010, and 2011,2012, respectively, for construction expenditures related to contractual purchase commitments for nuclear fuel included under “Fuel Commitments.” The construction programs are subject to periodic review and revision, and actual construction costs may vary from these estimates

II-164


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
because of numerous factors. These factors include: changes in business conditions; revised load growth estimates; changes in environmental statutes and regulations; changes in nuclear plants to meet new regulatory requirements; changes in FERC rules and regulations; Alabama PSC approvals; changes in legislation; the cost and efficiency of construction labor, equipment, and materials; project scope and design changes; and the cost of capital. In addition, there can be no assurance that costs related to capital expenditures will be fully recovered. At December 31, 2008,2009, significant purchase commitments were outstanding in connection with the construction program. The Company has no generating plants under construction. Construction of new transmission and distribution facilities and capital improvements, including those needed to meet environmental standards for existing generation, transmission, and distribution facilities, will continue.
Long-Term Service Agreements
The Company has entered into Long-Term Service Agreements (LTSAs) with General Electric (GE) for the purpose of securing maintenance support for its combined cycle and combustion turbine generating facilities. The LTSAs provide that GE will perform all planned inspections on the covered equipment, which includes the cost of all labor and materials. GE is also obligated to cover the costs of unplanned maintenance on the covered equipment subject to a limit specified in each contract.
In general, these LTSAs are in effect through two major inspection cycles per unit. Scheduled payments to GE, which are subject to price escalation, are made at various intervals based on actual operating hours of the respective units. Total remaining payments to GE under these agreements for facilities owned are currently estimated at $119$256 million over the remaining life of the agreements, which are currently estimated to range up to 810 years. However, the LTSAs contain various cancellation provisions at the option of the Company. Payments made to GE prior to the performance of any planned maintenance are recorded as either prepayments or other deferred charges and assets in the balance sheets. Inspection costs are capitalized or charged to expense based on the nature of the work performed.
Limestone Commitments
As part of the Company’s program to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions from its coal plants, the Company has begun construction of flue gas desulfurization projects and has entered into various long-term commitments for the procurement of limestone to be used in suchflue gas desulfurization equipment. Limestone contracts are structured with tonnage minimums and maximums in order to account for fluctuations in coal burn and sulfur content. The Company has a minimum contractual obligation of 3.02.9 million tons, equating to approximately $124$127 million, through 2019. Estimated expenditures (based on minimum contracted obligated dollars) over the next five years are $3 million in 2009, $10$11 million in 2010, $14$15 million in 2011, $14$15 million in 2012, and $15$16 million in 2013.2013, and $16 million in 2014.

II-157


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Fuel Commitments
To supply a portion of the fuel requirements of its generating plants, the Company has entered into various long-term commitments for the procurement of fossil and nuclear fuel. In most cases, these contracts contain provisions for price escalations, minimum purchase levels, and other financial commitments. Coal commitments include forward contract purchases for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissionemissions allowances. Natural gas purchase commitments contain fixed volumes with prices based on various indices at the time of delivery; amounts included in the chart below represent estimates based on New York Mercantile Exchange future prices at December 31, 2008.2009. Total estimated minimum long-term commitments at December 31, 20082009 were as follows:
                        
 Commitments Commitments
 Natural Gas Coal Nuclear Fuel Natural Gas Coal Nuclear Fuel
 (in millions) (in millions)
2009 $505 $1,461 $48 
2010 266 996 37  $413 $1,420 $73 
2011 120 808 45  275 894 48 
2012 154 636 44  176 695 51 
2013 157 474 32  141 516 37 
2014 and thereafter 210 1,414 10 
2014 113 407 23 
2015 and thereafter 148 975 90 
Total commitments $1,412 $5,789 $216  $1,266 $4,907 $322 
Additional commitments for fuel will be required to supply the Company’s future needs. Total charges for nuclear fuel included in fuel expense totaled $78 million in 2009, $70 million in 2008, and $65 million in 2007, and $66 million in 2006.

II-165


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
2007.
SCS may enter into various types of wholesale energy and natural gas contracts acting as an agent for the Company and all of the other traditional operating companies and Southern Power. Under these agreements, each of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power may be jointly and severally liable. The creditworthiness of Southern Power is currently inferior to the creditworthiness of the traditional operating companies. Accordingly, Southern Company has entered into keep-well agreements with the Company and each of the other traditional operating companies to ensure the Company will not subsidize or be responsible for any costs, losses, liabilities, or damages resulting from the inclusion of Southern Power as a contracting party under these agreements.
Purchased Power Commitments
The Company has entered into various long-term commitments for the purchase of electricity.capacity and energy. Total estimated minimum long-term obligations at December 31, 20082009 were as follows:
                        
 Commitments Commitments
 Affiliated Non-Affiliated Total Affiliated Non-Affiliated Total
 (in millions) (in millions) 
2009 $61 $44 $105 
2010 17 24 41  $13 $26 $39 
2011  3 3   30 30 
2012      30 30 
2013      31 31 
2014 and thereafter    
2014  36 36 
2015 and thereafter  337 337 
Total commitments $78 $71 $149  $13 $490 $503 
Certain PPAs reflected in the table are accounted for as operating leases.

II-158


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Operating Leases
The Company has entered into rental agreements for coal rail cars, vehicles, and other equipment with various terms and expiration dates. These expenses totaled $26.9 million in 2009, $26.1 million in 2008, and $27.7 million in 2007, and $30.3 million in 2006.2007. Of these amounts, $20.3 million, $19.2 million, and $20.5 million for 2009, 2008, and $21.5 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively, relate to the rail car leases and are recoverable through the Company’s Rate ECR. At December 31, 2008,2009, estimated minimum rental commitments for non-cancelable operating leases were as follows:
                        
 Minimum Lease Payments Minimum Lease Payments
 Rail Cars Vehicles & Other Total Rail Cars Vehicles & Other Total
 (in millions) (in millions) 
2009 $17 $6 $23 
2010 13 6 19  $16 $6 $22 
2011 5 4 9  7 4 11 
2012 5 2 7  7 3 10 
2013 4 1 5  4 1 5 
2014 and thereafter 11  11 
2014 3  3 
2015 and thereafter 10  10 
Total $55 $19 $74 
Total * $47 $14 $61 
Subsequent to December 31, 2008, the Company entered into rental agreements for coal rail cars resulting in the minimum lease commitments above increasing by $3 million in 2009, $4 million in 2010, $2 million in 2011, and $1 million each in years 2012 and 2013.
*Total does not include payments related to a non-affiliated PPA that is accounted for as an operating lease. Obligations related to this agreement are included in the above purchased power commitments table.
In addition to the rental commitments above, the Company has potential obligations upon expiration of certain leases with respect to the residual value of the leased property. These leases expire in 2010 and 2013, and the Company’s maximum obligations are $61.2 million and $18.6 million, respectively. At the termination of the leases, at the Company’s option, the Company may negotiate an extension, exercise its purchase option, or the property can be sold to a third party. The Company expects that the fair market value of the leased property would substantially eliminate the Company’s payments under the residual value obligations. However, due to the recessionary economy, it is possible that the fair market value of the leased property would not eliminate the Company’s payments under the residual value obligations on the leases expiring in 2010.
Guarantees
At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had outstanding guarantees related to SEGCO’s purchase of certain pollution control facilities and issuance of senior notes, as discussed in Note 4, and to certain residual values of leased assets as described above in “Operating Leases.”

II-166


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
8. STOCK OPTION PLAN
Southern Company provides non-qualified stock options to a large segment of the Company’s employees ranging from line management to executives. As of December 31, 2008,2009, there were 1,2671,412 current and former employees of the Company participating in the stock option plan and there were 33.221 million shares of Southern Company common stock remaining available for awards under this plan. The prices of options granted to date have been at the fair market value of the shares on the dates of grant. Options granted to date become exercisable pro rata over a maximum period of three years from the date of grant. The Company generally recognizes stock option expense on a straight-line basis over the vesting period which equates to the requisite service period; however, for employees who are eligible for retirement, the total cost is expensed at the grant date. Options outstanding will expire no later than 10 years after the date of grant, unless terminated earlier by the Southern Company Board of Directors in accordance with the stock option plan. For certain stock option awards, a change in control will provide accelerated vesting.
The estimated fair values of stock options granted in 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007 were derived using the Black-Scholes stock option pricing model. Expected volatility was based on historical volatility of Southern Company’s stock over a period equal to the expected term. The Company used historical exercise data to estimate the expected term that represents the period of time that options granted to employees are expected to be outstanding. The risk-free rate was based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant that covers the expected term of the stock options.

II-159


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The following table shows the assumptions used in the pricing model and the weighted average grant-date fair value of stock options granted:
                        
Year Ended December 31 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
Expected volatility  13.1%  14.8%  16.9%  15.6%  13.1%  14.8%
Expected term(in years)
 5.0 5.0 5.0  5.0 5.0 5.0 
Interest rate  2.8%  4.6%  4.6%  1.9%  2.8%  4.6%
Dividend yield  4.5%  4.3%  4.4%  5.4%  4.5%  4.3%
Weighted average grant-date fair value $2.37 $4.12 $4.15  $1.80 $2.37 $4.12 
The Company’s activity in the stock option plan for 20082009 is summarized below:
                
 Shares Subject Weighted Average Shares Subject Weighted Average
 to Option Exercise Price to Option Exercise Price
Outstanding at December 31, 2007 6,186,430 $30.50 
Outstanding at December 31, 2008 6,809,196 $31.61 
Granted 1,148,493 35.78  2,084,772 31.39 
Exercised  (522,381) 27.68   (137,082) 19.79 
Cancelled  (3,346) 32.31   (7,412) 29.40 
Outstanding at December 31, 2008
 6,809,196 $31.61 
Outstanding at December 31, 2009
 8,749,474 $31.74 
Exercisable at December 31, 2008
 4,610,589 $29.65 
Exercisable at December 31, 2009
 5,791,523 $31.10 
The number of stock options vested and expected to vest in the future, as of December 31, 20082009 was not significantly different from the number of stock options outstanding at December 31, 20082009 as stated above. As of December 31, 2008,2009, the weighted average remaining contractual term for the options outstanding and options exercisable was 6.16.0 years and 5.04.6 years, respectively, and the aggregate intrinsic value for the options outstanding and options exercisable was $36.7$20.8 million and $33.9$17.1 million, respectively.
As of December 31, 2008,2009, there was $1.1$1.0 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to stock option awards not yet vested. That cost is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 1011 months.
For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007 and 2006,2007, total compensation cost for stock option awards recognized in income was $3.8 million, $3.1 million, $4.9 million and $4.8$4.9 million, respectively, with the related tax benefit also recognized in income of $1.2$1.4 million, $1.9$1.2 million, and $1.9 million, respectively.
The compensation cost and tax benefits related to the grant and exercise of Southern Company stock options to the Company’s employees are recognized in the Company’s financial statements with a corresponding credit to equity, representing a capital contribution from Southern Company.

II-167


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007 and 2006 was $1.7 million, $5.2 million, $9.7 million, and $4.9$9.7 million, respectively. The actual tax benefit realized by the Company for the tax deductions from stock option exercises totaled $0.7 million, $2.0 million, $3.7 million, and $1.9$3.7 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006.2007.
9. NUCLEAR INSURANCE
Under the Price-Anderson Amendments Act (Act), the Company maintains agreements of indemnity with the NRC that, together with private insurance, cover third-party liability arising from any nuclear incident occurring at Plant Farley. The Act provides funds up to $12.5$12.6 billion for public liability claims that could arise from a single nuclear incident. Plant Farley is insured against this liability to a maximum of $300$375 million by American Nuclear Insurers (ANI), with the remaining coverage provided by a mandatory program of deferred premiums that could be assessed, after a nuclear incident, against all owners of commercial nuclear reactors. The Company could be assessed up to $117.5 million per incident for each licensed reactor it operates but not more than an aggregate of $17.5 million per incident to be paid in a calendar year for each reactor. Such maximum assessment, excluding any applicable state premium taxes, for the Company is $235 million per incident but not more than an aggregate of $35 million to be paid for each incident in any one year. Both the maximum assessment per reactor and the maximum yearly assessment are adjusted for inflation at least every five years. The next scheduled adjustment is due no later than October 29, 2013.

II-160


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The Company is a member of Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL), a mutual insurer established to provide property damage insurance in an amount up to $500 million for members’ nuclear generating facilities.
Additionally, the Company has policies that currently provide decontamination, excess property insurance, and premature decommissioning coverage up to $2.25 billion for losses in excess of the $500 million primary coverage. This excess insurance is also provided by NEIL. In the event of a loss, the amount of insurance available may not be adequate to cover property damage and other incurred expenses.
NEIL also covers the additional costs that would be incurred in obtaining replacement power during a prolonged accidental outage at a member’s nuclear plant. Members can purchase this coverage, subject to a deductible waiting period of up to 26 weeks, with a maximum per occurrence per unit limit of $490 million. After the deductible period, weekly indemnity payments would be received until either the unit is operational or until the limit is exhausted in approximately three years. The Company purchases the maximum limit allowed by NEIL and has elected a 12-week deductible waiting period.
Under each of the NEIL policies, members are subject to assessments if losses each year exceed the accumulated funds available to the insurer under that policy. The current maximum annual assessments for the Company under the NEIL policies would be $39$38 million.
Claims resulting from terrorist acts are covered under both the ANI and NEIL policies (subject to normal policy limits). The aggregate, however, that NEIL will pay for all claims resulting from terrorist acts in any 12 month period is $3.2 billion plus such additional amounts NEIL can recover through reinsurance, indemnity, or other sources.
For all on-site property damage insurance policies for commercial nuclear power plants, the NRC requires that the proceeds of such policies shall be dedicated first for the sole purpose of placing the reactor in a safe and stable condition after an accident. Any remaining proceeds are to be applied next toward the costs of decontamination and debris removal operations ordered by the NRC, and any further remaining proceeds are to be paid either to the Company or to its bond trustees as may be appropriate under the policies and applicable trust indentures.
All retrospective assessments, whether generated for liability, property, or replacement power, may be subject to applicable state premium taxes.
10. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
On January 1, 2008, the Company adopted FASB Statement No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (SFAS No. 157) which defines fairFair value establishes a framework for measuring fair value, and requires additional disclosures about fair value measurements. The criterion that is set forth in SFAS No. 157 is applicable to fair value measurement where it is permitted or required under other accounting pronouncements.
SFAS No. 157 defines fair value as the exit price, which is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The fair value measurement ismeasurements are based on inputs of observable and unobservable market data that a market participant would use in pricing the asset or liability. The use of observable inputs is maximized where available and the use of unobservable inputs is minimized for fair value measurement. As a

II-168


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2008 Annual Report
means to illustrate the inputs used, SFAS No. 157 establishesmeasurement and reflects a three-tier fair value hierarchy that prioritizes inputs to valuation techniques used for fair value measurement.
  Level 1 consists of observable market data in an active market for identical assets or liabilities.
 
  Level 2 consists of observable market data, other than that included in Level 1, that is either directly or indirectly observable.
 
  Level 3 consists of unobservable market data. The input may reflect the assumptions of the Company of what a market participant would use in pricing an asset or liability. If there is little available market data, then the Company’s own assumptions are the best available information.
In the case of multiple inputs being used in a fair value measurement, the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement represents the level in the fair value hierarchy in which the fair value measurement is reported.

II-161


The adoption
NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
As of SFAS No. 157 has not resulted in any significant changes to the methodologies used for fair value measurement. Primarily all the changes in the fair value ofDecember 31, 2009, assets and liabilities are recorded in other comprehensive income or regulatory assets and liabilities, and thus the impact on earnings is limited to derivatives that do not qualify for hedge accounting.
Themeasured at fair value measurements performed on a recurring basis andduring the period, together with the level of the fair value hierarchy in which they fall, at December 31, 2008 are as follows:
                                
At December 31, 2008: Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total
 Fair Value Measurements Using
 Quoted Prices      
 in Active Significant    
 Markets for Other Significant  
 Identical Observable Unobservable  
 Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2009: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
 (in millions) (in millions)
Assets:  
Energy-related derivatives $ $3.6 $ $3.6  $ $1 $ $1 
Nuclear decommissioning trusts(a)
 237.4 165.5  402.9 
Nuclear decommissioning trusts:(a)
 
Domestic equity 296 49  345 
U.S. Treasury and government agency securities 11 5  16 
Corporate bonds  76  76 
Mortgage and asset backed securities  42  42 
Other  9  9 
Cash equivalents and restricted cash 80.1   80.1  346   346 
Total fair value $317.5 $169.1 $ $486.6 
Total $653 $182 $ $835 
  
Liabilities:  
Energy-related derivatives $ $95.5 $ $95.5  $ $45 $ $45 
Interest rate derivatives  10.9  10.9   4  4 
Total fair value $ $106.4 $ $106.4 
Total $ $49 $ $49 
(a) Excludes receivables related to investment income, pending investment sales, and payables related to pending investment purchases.
Energy-related derivatives and interest rate derivatives primarily consist of over-the-counter contracts. See Note 6 under “Financial Instruments”11 herein for additional information. The nuclear decommissioning trust funds are invested in a diversified mix of equity and fixed income securities. See Note 1 under “Nuclear Decommissioning” for additional information. The cash equivalents and restricted cash consist of securities with original maturities of 90 days or less. All of these financial instruments and investments are valued primarily using the market approach.
As of December 31, 2009, the fair value measurements of investments calculated at net asset value per share (or its equivalent), as well as the nature and risks of those investments, are as follows:
                 
      Unfunded Redemption Redemption
As of December 31, 2009: Fair Value Commitments Frequency Notice Period
  (in millions)            
Nuclear decommissioning trusts:                
Trust owned life insurance $78  None Daily 15 days
Cash equivalents and restricted cash:                
Money market funds  346  None Daily Not applicable
The nuclear decommissioning trust includes investments in Trust-Owned Life Insurance (TOLI). The taxable nuclear decommissioning trust invests in the TOLI in order to minimize the impact of taxes on the portfolio and can draw on the value of the TOLI via death proceeds, loans against the cash surrender value, and/or the cash surrender value, subject to legal restrictions. The amounts reported in the tables above reflect the fair value of investments the insurer has made in relation to the TOLI agreements. The nuclear decommissioning trust does not own the underlying investments, but the fair value of the investments approximates the cash surrender value of the TOLI policies. The investments made by the insurer are in commingled funds. The commingled funds primarily include investments in domestic and international equity securities and predominantly high-quality fixed income securities. These fixed income securities include U.S. Treasury and government agency fixed income securities, non-U.S. government and agency fixed income securities, domestic and foreign corporate fixed income securities, and, to some degree, mortgage and asset backed securities. The passively managed funds seek to replicate the performance of a related index. The actively managed funds seek to exceed the performance of a related index through security analysis and selection.

II-162


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The money market funds are short-term investments of excess funds in various money market mutual funds, which are portfolios of short-term debt securities. The money market funds are regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission and typically receive the highest rating from credit rating agencies. Regulatory and rating agency requirements for money market funds include minimum credit ratings and maximum maturities for individual securities and a maximum weighted average portfolio maturity. Redemptions are available on a same day basis, up to the full amount of the Company’s investment in the money market funds.
As of December 31, 2009, other financial instruments for which the carrying amount did not equal fair value were as follows:
         
  Carrying Amount Fair Value
  (in millions)
Long-term debt:        
2009
 $6,182  $6,357 
2008  5,855   5,784 
The fair values were based on either closing market prices (Level 1) or closing prices of comparable instruments (Level 2).
11. DERIVATIVES
The Company is exposed to market risks, primarily commodity price risk and interest rate risk. To manage the volatility attributable to these exposures, the Company nets its exposures, where possible, to take advantage of natural offsets and enters into various derivative transactions for the remaining exposures pursuant to the Company’s policies in areas such as counterparty exposure and risk management practices. The Company’s policy is that derivatives are to be used primarily for hedging purposes and mandates strict adherence to all applicable risk management policies. Derivative positions are monitored using techniques including, but not limited to, market valuation, value at risk, stress testing, and sensitivity analysis. Derivative instruments are recognized at fair value in the balance sheets as either assets or liabilities.
Energy-Related Derivatives
The Company enters into energy-related derivatives to hedge exposures to electricity, gas, and other fuel price changes. However, due to cost-based rate regulations, the Company has limited exposure to market volatility in commodity fuel prices and prices of electricity. The Company manages fuel-hedging programs, implemented per the guidelines of the Alabama PSC, through the use of financial derivative contracts.
To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in electricity prices, the Company enters into physical fixed-price contracts for the purchase and sale of electricity through the wholesale electricity market. To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in gas prices, the Company may enter into fixed-price contracts for natural gas purchases; however, a significant portion of contracts are priced at market.
Energy-related derivative contracts are accounted for in one of three methods:
Regulatory Hedges– Energy-related derivative contracts which are designated as regulatory hedges relate primarily to the Company’s fuel hedging programs, where gains and losses are initially recorded as regulatory liabilities and assets, respectively, and then are included in fuel expense as the underlying fuel is used in operations and ultimately recovered through the fuel cost recovery clause.
Cash Flow Hedges– Gains and losses on energy-related derivatives designated as cash flow hedges are used to hedge anticipated purchases and sales and are initially deferred in other comprehensive income (OCI) before being recognized in income in the same period as the hedged transactions are reflected in earnings.
Not Designated– Gains and losses on energy-related derivative contracts that are not designated or fail to qualify as hedges are recognized in the statements of income as incurred.
Some energy-related derivative contracts require physical delivery as opposed to financial settlement, and this type of derivative is both common and prevalent within the electric industry. When an energy-related derivative contract is settled physically, any cumulative unrealized gain or loss is reversed and the contract price is recognized in the respective line item representing the actual price of the underlying goods being delivered.

II-163


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
At December 31, 2009, the net volume of energy-related derivative contracts for natural gas positions for the Company, together with the longest hedge date over which it is hedging its exposure to the variability in future cash flows for forecasted transactions and the longest date for derivatives not designated as hedges, were as follows:
     
Net    
Purchased    
mmBtu* Longest Hedge Longest Non-Hedge
(in millions) Date Date
 
37 2014 
*mmBtu – million British thermal units
For cash flow hedges, the amounts expected to be reclassified from OCI to revenue and fuel expense for the next 12-month period ending December 31, 2010 are immaterial.
Interest Rate Derivatives
The Company also enters into interest rate derivatives, which include forward-starting interest rate swaps, to hedge exposure to changes in interest rates. Derivatives related to existing variable rate securities or forecasted transactions are accounted for as cash flow hedges. The derivatives employed as hedging instruments are structured to minimize ineffectiveness.
For cash flow hedges, the fair value gains or losses are recorded in OCI and are reclassified into earnings at the same time the hedged transactions affect earnings.
At December 31, 2009, the Company had outstanding interest rate derivatives designated as cash flow hedges of existing debt as follows:
         
    Weighted   Fair Value
Notional Variable Rate Average Hedge Maturity Gain (Loss)
Amount Received Fixed Rate Paid Date December 31, 2009
(in millions)       (in millions)
$576 SIFMA Index* 2.69% February 2010 $(4)
 
*Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association Municipal Swap Index (SIFMA)
The estimated pre-tax loss that will be reclassified from OCI to interest expense for the next 12-month period ending December 31, 2010 is $1.0 million. The Company has deferred gains and losses that are expected to be amortized into earnings through 2035.

II-164


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Derivative Financial Statement Presentation and Amounts
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the fair value of energy-related derivatives and interest rate derivatives was reflected in the balance sheets as follows:
                     
  Asset Derivatives Liability Derivatives
  Balance Sheet         Balance Sheet    
Derivative Category Location 2009 2008 Location 2009 2008
    (in millions)   (in millions)
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments for regulatory purposes
                    
Energy-related derivatives: Other current assets $1  $4  Liabilities from risk management activities $34  $75 
  Other deferred charges and assets       Other deferred credits and liabilities  11   21 
 
Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments for regulatory purposes
   $1  $4    $45  $96 
 
                     
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments in cash flow hedges
                    
Interest rate derivatives: Other current assets       Liabilities from risk management activities  4   9 
  Other deferred charges and assets       Other deferred credits and liabilities     2 
 
Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments in cash flow hedges
   $  $    $4  $11 
 
                     
Total
   $1  $4    $49  $107 
 
All derivative instruments are measured at fair value. See Note 10 for additional information.
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the pre-tax effect of unrealized derivative gains (losses) arising from energy-related derivative instruments designated as regulatory hedging instruments and deferred on the balance sheets were as follows:
                     
  Unrealized Losses         Unrealized Gains        
  Balance Sheet         Balance Sheet    
Derivative Category Location 2009 2008 Location 2009 2008
    (in millions)   (in millions)
Energy-related derivatives: Other regulatory assets, current $(34) $(75) Other regulatory liabilities, current $1  $4 
  Other regulatory assets, deferred  (11)  (21) Other regulatory liabilities, deferred      
 
Total energy-related derivative gains (losses)
   $(45) $(96)   $1  $4 
 

II-165


NOTES (continued)
Alabama Power Company 2009 Annual Report
For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, the pre-tax effect of interest rate derivatives designated as cash flow hedging instruments on the statements of income were as follows:
                             
  Gain (Loss) Recognized in Gain (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated OCI into Income
Derivatives in Cash Flow OCI on Derivative (Effective Portion)
Hedging Relationships (Effective Portion)     Amount
              Statements of Income      
Derivative Category 2009 2008 2007 Location 2009 2008 2007
  (in millions)     (in millions)
Interest rate derivatives $(5) $(11) $(3) Interest expense $(12) $(3) $(1)
 
There was no material ineffectiveness recorded in earnings for any period presented.
For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, the pre-tax effect of energy-related derivatives not designated as hedging instruments were immaterial.
Contingent Features
The Company does not have any credit arrangements that would require material changes in payment schedules or terminations as a result of a credit rating downgrade. There are certain derivatives that could require collateral, but not accelerated payment, in the event of various credit rating changes of certain affiliated companies. At December 31, 2009, the fair value of derivative liabilities with contingent features was $7.6 million.
At December 31, 2009, the Company had no collateral posted with its derivative counterparties; however, because of the joint and several liability features underlying these derivatives, the maximum potential collateral requirements arising from the credit-risk-related contingent features, at a rating below BBB- and/or Baa3, is $33.3 million.
Currently, the Company has investment grade credit ratings from the major rating agencies with respect to debt, preferred securities, preferred stock, and/or preference stock.
Generally, collateral may be provided by a Southern Company guaranty, letter of credit, or cash. The Company participated in certain agreements that could require collateral in the event that one or more Southern Company system power pool participants has a credit rating change to below investment grade.
12. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL INFORMATION (UNAUDITED)
Summarized quarterly financial information for 20082009 and 20072008 are as follows:
                        
 Net Income After Net Income After
 Operating Operating Dividends on Preferred Operating Operating Dividends on Preferred
Quarter Ended Revenues Income and Preference Stock Revenues Income and Preference Stock
 (in millions)
March 2009
 $1,340 $299 $146 
June 2009
 1,366 349 177 
September 2009
 1,592 483 261 
December 2009
 1,231 189 86 
 (in millions) 
March 2008
 $1,337 $274 $130  $1,337 $274 $130 
June 2008
 1,470 319 153  1,470 319 153 
September 2008
 1,865 478 252  1,865 478 252 
December 2008
 1,405 198 81  1,405 198 81 
 
March 2007 $1,197 $255 $115 
June 2007 1,336 311 147 
September 2007 1,635 476 246 
December 2007 1,192 173 72 
The Company’s business is influenced by seasonal weather conditions.

II-169II-166


SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA 2004-20082005-2009

Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                                        
 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004  2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 
Operating Revenues (in thousands)
 $6,076,931 $5,359,993 $5,014,728 $4,647,824 $4,235,991  $5,528,574 $6,076,931 $5,359,993 $5,014,728 $4,647,824 
Net Income after Dividends on Preferred and Preference Stock (in thousands)
 $615,959 $579,582 $517,730 $507,895 $481,171  $669,536 $615,959 $579,582 $517,730 $507,895 
Cash Dividends on Common Stock (in thousands)
 $491,300 $465,000 $440,600 $409,900 $437,300  $522,800 $491,300 $465,000 $440,600 $409,900 
Return on Average Common Equity (percent)
 13.30 13.73 13.23 13.72 13.53  13.27 13.30 13.73 13.23 13.72 
Total Assets (in thousands)
 $16,536,006 $15,746,625 $14,655,290 $13,689,907 $12,781,525  $17,524,093 $16,536,006 $15,746,625 $14,655,290 $13,689,907 
Gross Property Additions (in thousands)
 $1,532,673 $1,203,300 $960,759 $890,062 $786,298  $1,322,596 $1,532,673 $1,203,300 $960,759 $890,062 
Capitalization (in thousands):
  
Common stock equity $4,854,310 $4,410,683 $4,032,287 $3,792,726 $3,610,204  $5,236,461 $4,854,310 $4,410,683 $4,032,287 $3,792,726 
Preferred and preference stock 685,127 683,512 612,407 465,046 465,047 
Preference stock 343,373 343,412 343,466 147,361  
Redeemable preferred stock 341,715 341,715 340,046 465,046 465,046 
Long-term debt 5,604,791 4,750,196 4,148,185 3,869,465 4,164,536  6,082,489 5,604,791 4,750,196 4,148,185 3,869,465 
Total (excluding amounts due within one year) $11,144,228 $9,844,391 $8,792,879 $8,127,237 $8,239,787  $12,004,038 $11,144,228 $9,844,391 $8,792,879 $8,127,237 
Capitalization Ratios (percent):
  
Common stock equity 43.6 44.8 45.9 46.7 43.8  43.6 43.6 44.8 45.9 46.7 
Preferred and preference stock 6.1 6.9 7.0 5.7 5.6 
Preference stock 2.9 3.1 3.5 1.7  
Redeemable preferred stock 2.8 3.0 3.4 5.3 5.7 
Long-term debt 50.3 48.3 47.1 47.6 50.6  50.7 50.3 48.3 47.1 47.6 
Total (excluding amounts due within one year) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0  100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 
Security Ratings:
  
First Mortgage Bonds —  
Moody’s    A1 A1      A1 
Standard and Poor’s    A+ A      A+ 
Fitch    AA- AA-      AA- 
Preferred Stock/ Preference Stock —  
Moody’s Baa1 Baa1 Baa1 Baa1 Baa1  Baa1 Baa1 Baa1 Baa1 Baa1 
Standard and Poor’s BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+  BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ 
Fitch A A A A A  A A A A A 
Unsecured Long-Term Debt —  
Moody’s A2 A2 A2 A2 A2  A2 A2 A2 A2 A2 
Standard and Poor’s A A A A A  A A A A A 
Fitch A+ A+ A+ A+ A+  A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ 
Customers (year-end):
  
Residential 1,220,046 1,207,883 1,194,696 1,184,406 1,170,814  1,229,134 1,220,046 1,207,883 1,194,696 1,184,406 
Commercial 211,119 216,830 214,723 212,546 208,547  198,642 211,119 216,830 214,723 212,546 
Industrial 5,906 5,849 5,750 5,492 5,260  5,912 5,906 5,849 5,750 5,492 
Other 775 772 766 759 753  780 775 772 766 759 
Total 1,437,846 1,431,334 1,415,935 1,403,203 1,385,374  1,434,468 1,437,846 1,431,334 1,415,935 1,403,203 
Employees (year-end)
 6,997 6,980 6,796 6,621 6,745  6,842 6,997 6,980 6,796 6,621 

II-170II-167


SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA 2004-20082005-2009 (continued)

Alabama Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                                        
 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004  2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 
Operating Revenues (in thousands):
  
Residential $1,997,603 $1,833,563 $1,664,304 $1,476,211 $1,346,669  $1,961,678 $1,997,603 $1,833,563 $1,664,304 $1,476,211 
Commercial 1,459,466 1,313,642 1,172,436 1,062,341 980,771  1,429,601 1,459,466 1,313,642 1,172,436 1,062,341 
Industrial 1,381,100 1,238,368 1,140,225 1,065,124 948,528  1,080,208 1,381,100 1,238,368 1,140,225 1,065,124 
Other 24,112 21,383 18,766 17,745 16,860  25,594 24,112 21,383 18,766 17,745 
Total retail 4,862,281 4,406,956 3,995,731 3,621,421 3,292,828  4,497,081 4,862,281 4,406,956 3,995,731 3,621,421 
Wholesale — non-affiliates 711,903 627,047 634,552 551,408 483,839  619,859 711,903 627,047 634,552 551,408 
Wholesale — affiliates 308,482 144,089 216,028 288,956 308,312  236,995 308,482 144,089 216,028 288,956 
Total revenues from sales of electricity 5,882,666 5,178,092 4,846,311 4,461,785 4,084,979  5,353,935 5,882,666 5,178,092 4,846,311 4,461,785 
Other revenues 194,265 181,901 168,417 186,039 151,012  174,639 194,265 181,901 168,417 186,039 
Total $6,076,931 $5,359,993 $5,014,728 $4,647,824 $4,235,991  5,528,574 $6,076,931 $5,359,993 $5,014,728 $4,647,824 
Kilowatt-Hour Sales (in thousands):
  
Residential 18,379,801 18,874,039 18,632,935 18,073,783 17,368,321  18,071,471 18,379,801 18,874,039 18,632,935 18,073,783 
Commercial 14,551,495 14,761,243 14,355,091 14,061,650 13,822,926  14,185,622 14,551,495 14,761,243 14,355,091 14,061,650 
Industrial 22,074,616 22,805,676 23,187,328 23,349,769 22,854,399  18,555,377 22,074,616 22,805,676 23,187,328 23,349,769 
Other 201,283 200,874 199,445 198,715 198,253  217,594 201,283 200,874 199,445 198,715 
Total retail 55,207,195 56,641,832 56,374,799 55,683,917 54,243,899  51,030,064 55,207,195 56,641,832 56,374,799 55,683,917 
Sales for resale — non-affiliates�� 15,203,960 15,769,485 15,978,465 15,442,728 15,483,420 
Sales for resale — affiliates 5,256,130 3,241,168 5,145,107 5,735,429 7,233,880 
Wholesale — non-affiliates 14,316,742 15,203,960 15,769,485 15,978,465 15,442,728 
Wholesale — affiliates 6,473,084 5,256,130 3,241,168 5,145,107 5,735,429 
Total 75,667,285 75,652,485 77,498,371 76,862,074 76,961,199  71,819,890 75,667,285 75,652,485 77,498,371 76,862,074 
Average Revenue Per Kilowatt-Hour (cents):
  
Residential 10.87 9.71 8.93 8.17 7.75  10.86 10.87 9.71 8.93 8.17 
Commercial 10.03 8.90 8.17 7.55 7.10  10.08 10.03 8.90 8.17 7.55 
Industrial 6.26 5.43 4.92 4.56 4.15  5.82 6.26 5.43 4.92 4.56 
Total retail 8.81 7.78 7.09 6.50 6.07  8.81 8.81 7.78 7.09 6.50 
Wholesale 4.99 4.06 4.03 3.97 3.49  4.12 4.99 4.06 4.03 3.97 
Total sales 7.77 6.84 6.25 5.80 5.31  7.45 7.77 6.84 6.25 5.80 
Residential Average Annual Kilowatt-Hour Use Per Customer
 15,162 15,696 15,663 15,347 14,894  14,716 15,162 15,696 15,663 15,347 
Residential Average Annual Revenue Per Customer
 $1,648 $1,525 $1,399 $1,253 $1,155  $1,597 $1,648 $1,525 $1,399 $1,253 
Plant Nameplate Capacity Ratings (year-end) (megawatts)
 12,222 12,222 12,222 12,216 12,216  12,222 12,222 12,222 12,222 12,216 
Maximum Peak-Hour Demand (megawatts):
  
Winter 10,747 10,144 10,309 9,812 9,556  10,701 10,747 10,144 10,309 9,812 
Summer 11,518 12,211 11,744 11,162 10,938  10,870 11,518 12,211 11,744 11,162 
Annual Load Factor (percent)
 60.9 59.4 61.8 63.2 63.2  59.8 60.9 59.4 61.8 63.2 
Plant Availability (percent):
  
Fossil-steam 90.08 88.2 89.6 90.5 87.8  88.5 90.1 88.2 89.6 90.5 
Nuclear 94.13 87.5 93.3 92.9 88.7  93.3 94.1 87.5 93.3 92.9 
Source of Energy Supply (percent):
  
Coal 58.5 60.9 60.2 59.5 56.5  53.4 58.5 60.9 60.2 59.5 
Nuclear 17.8 16.5 17.4 17.2 16.4  18.6 17.8 16.5 17.4 17.2 
Hydro 2.9 1.8 3.8 5.6 5.6  7.9 2.9 1.8 3.8 5.6 
Gas 9.2 8.7 7.6 6.8 8.9  11.8 9.2 8.7 7.6 6.8 
Purchased power —            
From non-affiliates 2.9 1.8 2.1 3.8 5.4  2.0 2.9 1.8 2.1 3.8 
From affiliates 8.7 10.3 8.9 7.1 7.2  6.3 8.7 10.3 8.9 7.1 
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0  100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

II-171II-168


GEORGIA POWER COMPANY
FINANCIAL SECTION

II-172II-169


MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING

Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
The management of Georgia Power Company (the “Company”) is responsible for establishing and maintaining an adequate system of internal control over financial reporting as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). A control system can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.
Under management’s supervision, an evaluation of the design and effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was conducted based on the framework inInternal Control—Integrated Frameworkissued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this evaluation, management concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2008.2009.
This Annual Report does not include an attestation report of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation by the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit the Company to provide only management’s report in this Annual Report.
/s/ Michael D. Garrett

Michael D. Garrett
President and Chief Executive Officer
/s/ Cliff S. Thrasher

Cliff S. ThrasherRonnie R. Labrato
Ronnie R. Labrato
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer
February 25, 20092010

II-173II-170


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Georgia Power Company
We have audited the accompanying balance sheets and statements of capitalization of Georgia Power Company (the “Company”) (a wholly owned subsidiary of Southern Company) as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, and the related statements of income, comprehensive income, common stockholder’s equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008.2009. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such financial statements (pages II-199II-196 to II-238)II-241) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Georgia Power Company at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008,2009, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
February 25, 20092010

II-174II-171


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
OVERVIEW
Business Activities
Georgia Power Company (the Company) operates as a vertically integrated utility providing electricity to retail customers within its traditional service area located within the State of Georgia and to wholesale customers in the Southeast.
Many factors affect the opportunities, challenges, and risks of the Company’s business of selling electricity. These factors include the ability to maintain a constructive regulatory environment, to maintain energy sales ingiven the midsteffects of the current economic downturn,recession, and to effectively manage and secure timely recovery of rising costs. These costs include those related to projected long-term demand growth, increasingly stringent environmental standards, and fuel prices. In December 2007, theThe Company completed a major retail rate proceeding (2007 Retail Rate Plan) that enables the recovery of substantial capital investments to facilitate the continued reliability of the transmissionis currently constructing two new nuclear and distribution networks, continued generation, and other investments as well as the recovery of increased operating costs. The 2007 Retail Rate Plan includes a tariff specifically for the recovery of costs related to environmental controls mandated by state and federal regulations.three new combined cycle generating units. Appropriately balancing required costs and capital expenditures with customer prices will continue to challenge the Company for the foreseeable future. On August 27, 2009, the Georgia Public Service Commission (PSC) approved an accounting order that allows the Company to amortize up to $324 million of its regulatory liability related to other cost of removal obligations over the 18-month period ending December 31, 2010 in lieu of filing a request for a base rate increase. The Company is required to file a general base rate case by July 1, 2010, which will determine whether the 2007 Retail Rate Plan should be continued, modified, or discontinued.2010. The Company also received regulatory ordersfiled for an adjustment to increase its fuel cost recovery rate effective July 1, 2006,on December 15, 2009. On February 22, 2010, the Company, the Georgia PSC Public Interest Advocacy Staff, and three customer groups entered into a stipulation to resolve the case, subject to approval by the Georgia PSC. A final decision by the Georgia PSC is expected on March 1, 2007, and June 1, 2008. The Company expects to file its next11, 2010. If approved, the new fuel cost recovery caserates will go into effect on March 13, 2009.April 1, 2010.
Key Performance Indicators
In striving to maximize shareholder value while providing cost-effective energy to more than two million customers, the Company continues to focus on several key indicators. These indicators include customer satisfaction, plant availability, system reliability, and net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock. The Company’s financial success is directly tied to the satisfaction of its customers. Key elements of ensuring customer satisfaction include outstanding service, high reliability, and competitive prices. Management uses customer satisfaction surveys and reliability indicators to evaluate the Company’s results.
Peak season equivalent forced outage rate (Peak Season EFOR) is an indicator of fossil/hydro and nuclear plant availability and efficient generation fleet operations during the months when generation needs are greatest. The rate is calculated by dividing the number of hours of forced outages by total generation hours. The 20082009 fossil/hydro Peak Season EFOR of 0.84%1.43% was better than the target. The nuclear generating fleet also uses Peak Season EFOR as an indicator of availability and efficient generation fleet operations during the peak season. The 20082009 nuclear Peak Season EFOR of 1.64%3.70% was also better thanabove the target.target due to an unplanned outage at Plant Hatch. Transmission and distribution system reliability performance is measured by the frequency and duration of outages. Performance targets for reliability are set internally based on historical performance, expected weather conditions, and expected capital expenditures. The 20082009 performance was better than the target for these reliability measures.
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock is the primary componentmeasure of the Company’s contribution to Southern Company’s earnings per share goal.
financial performance. The Company’s 20082009 results compared to its targets for some of these key indicators are reflected in the following chart:
            
 2008 2008 2009 2009
 Target Actual Target Actual
Key Performance Indicator Performance Performance Performance Performance
Customer Satisfaction
 Top quartile in
customer surveys
 Top quartile in
customer surveys
 Top quartile in
customer surveys
 Top quartile in
customer surveys
Peak Season EFOR — fossil/hydro
 2.75% or less  0.84% 2.75% or less  1.43%
Peak Season EFOR — nuclear
 2.00% or less  1.64% 2.75% or less  3.70%
Net Income
 $900 million $903 million $856 million $814 million
See RESULTS OF OPERATIONS herein for additional information on the Company’s financial performance. The Company’s net income target for 2009 was set lower than in the prior year to reflect the economic downturn that began in late 2008; however, the global recession’s impacts on energy demand were greater than anticipated. As the recession escalated, management emphasized stringent cost-containment efforts to partially offset the resulting revenue declines and, in lieu of a rate increase, worked with the Georgia PSC to develop the accounting order discussed previously. Although the Company did not meet its target, these efforts provided substantial improvement in the Company’s financial performance achieved in 2008 reflectscondition while consistently demonstrating the continued emphasis that management places on these indicators, as well as theCompany’s commitment shown by employees in achieving or exceeding management’s expectations.to customer service, reliability, and competitive prices.

II-175II-172


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Earnings
The Company’s 2009 net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock totaled $814 million representing an $88.9 million, or 9.8%, decrease from 2008. The decrease was primarily related to lower commercial and industrial base revenues resulting from the recessionary economy and decreased revenues from market-response rates to large commercial and industrial customers that were partially offset by cost containment activities, increased recognition of environmental compliance cost recovery revenues, and the amortization of the regulatory liability related to other cost of removal activities as authorized by the Georgia PSC. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “PSC Matters – Rate Plans” herein and Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters – Rate Plans” for additional information. The Company’s 2008 net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock totaled $903 million representing a $66.8 million, or 8.0%, increase over 2007. The increase was primarily related to increased contributions from market-response rates for large commercial and industrial customers, higher retail base revenues resulting from the retail rate increase effective January 1, 2008 (2007 Retail Rate Plan), and increased allowance for equity funds used during construction. These increases were partially offset by increased depreciation and amortization resulting from more plant in service and changes to depreciation rates. The Company’s 2007 earnings totaled $836 million representing a $48.9 million, or 6.2%, increase over 2006. Operating income increased slightly in 2007 primarily due to increased operating revenues from transmission and outdoor lighting and decreased property taxes, partially offset by higher non-fuel operating expenses. Net income increased primarily due to higher allowance for equity funds used during construction and lower income tax expenses resulting from the Company’s donation of Tallulah Gorge to the State of Georgia, partially offset by higher financing costs. The Company’s 2006 earnings totaled $787 million representing a $42.9 million, or 5.8%, increase over 2005. Operating income increased in 2006 due to higher base retail revenues and wholesale non-fuel revenues, partially offset by an increase in non-fuel operating expenses.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
A condensed income statement for the Company follows:
                                
 Increase (Decrease)   Increase (Decrease)
 Amount from Prior Year   Amount from Prior Year
 2008 2008 2007 2006 2009 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
Operating revenues $8,412 $840 $326 $170  $7,692 $(720) $840 $326 
Fuel 2,813 172 408 296  2,717  (95) 172 408 
Purchased power 1,405 355  (95)  (171) 979  (426) 355  (95)
Other operations and maintenance 1,581 19 1  (11) 1,494  (87) 19 1 
Depreciation and amortization 637 126 13  (28) 655 18 126 13 
Taxes other than income taxes 316 25  (8) 23  317  25  (8)
Total operating expenses 6,752 697 319 109  6,162  (590) 697 319 
Operating income 1,660 143 7 61  1,530  (130) 143 7 
Total other income and (expense)  (252) 5 18  (22)  (289)  (37) 5 18 
Income taxes 488 70  (25)  (5) 410  (78) 70  (25)
Net income 920 78 50 44  831  (89) 78 50 
Dividends on preferred and preference stock 17 11 1 1  17  11 1 
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock $903 $67 $49 $43  $814 $(89) $67 $49 

II-176II-173


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Operating Revenues
Operating revenues in 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006,2007 and the percent of change from the prior year were as follows:
                        
 Amount Amount
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
Retail — prior year $6,498.0 $6,205.6 $6,064.4  $7,287 $6,498 $6,206 
Estimated change in —           
Rates and pricing 396.9  (66.2)  (76.8)  (64) 397  (66)
Sales growth  (20.9) 46.5 76.6 
Sales growth (decline)  (93)  (21) 46 
Weather  (37.7) 17.7 7.5   (6)  (37) 18 
Fuel cost recovery 450.1 294.4 133.9   (212) 450 294 
Retail — current year 7,286.4 6,498.0 6,205.6  6,912 7,287 6,498 
Wholesale revenues —  
Non-affiliates 568.8 537.9 551.7  395 569 538 
Affiliates 286.2 277.9 252.6  112 286 278 
Total wholesale revenues 855.0 815.8 804.3  507 855 816 
Other operating revenues 270.2 257.9 235.7  273 270 258 
Total operating revenues $8,411.6 $7,571.7 $7,245.6  $7,692 $8,412 $7,572 
Percent change  11.1%  4.5%  2.4%  (8.6)%  11.1%  4.5%
Retail base revenues of $3.9 billion in 2009 decreased by $161.8 million, or 3.9%, from 2008 primarily due to lower industrial and commercial base revenues resulting from the recessionary economy and decreased revenues from market-response rates to large commercial and industrial customers. Industrial base revenues decreased $207.1 million, or 27.9%, and commercial base revenues decreased $35.8 million, or 2.1%. These decreases were partially offset by an increase in residential base revenues of $78.4 million, or 4.8%. All customer classes were positively affected by increased recognition of environmental compliance cost recovery revenues. Retail base revenues of $4.1 billion in 2008 increased by $338.3 million, or 9.0%, from 2007 primarily due to an increase in revenues from market-response rates to large commercial and industrial customers, the retail rate increase effective January 1, 2008, and a 0.7% increase in retail customers. The increase was partially offset by a weak economy in the Southeast and moreless favorable weather impacts in 20072008 than in 2008.2007. Retail base revenues were $3.8 billion in 2007. There was not a material change in total retail base revenues compared to 2006, although industrial base revenues decreased $56.5 million, or 8.5%, primarily due to lower sales and a lower contribution from market-response rates for large commercial and industrial customers. This decrease was partially offset by a $31.8 million, or 2.1%, increase in residential base revenues as well as a $22.6 million, or 1.5%, increase in commercial base revenues primarily due to higher sales from favorable weather and customer growth of 1.2%. Retail base revenues of $3.8 billion in 2006 increased by $7 million, or 0.2%, from 2005 primarily due to customer growth of 1.9% and more favorable weather, partially offset by lower contributions from market-response rates to large commercial and industrial customers. See “Energy Sales” below for a discussion of changes in the volume of energy sold, including changes related to sales growth (decline) and weather.
Electric rates include provisions to adjust billings for fluctuations in fuel costs, including the energy component of purchased power costs. Under these fuel cost recovery provisions, fuel revenues generally equal fuel expenses, including the fuel component of purchased power, and do not affect net income. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “PSC Matters — Fuel Cost Recovery” herein for additional information.

II-177II-174


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Wholesale revenues from sales to non-affiliated utilities were as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 20082007
 (in millions) (in millions)
Unit power sales —  
Capacity $40 $33 $33  $43 $40 $33 
Energy 44 33 38  26 44 33 
Total 84 66 71  69 84 66 
Other power sales —  
Capacity and other 129 158 165  140 129 158 
Energy 356 314 316  186 356 314 
Total 485 472 481  326 485 472 
Total non-affiliated $569 $538 $552  $395 $569 $538 
Wholesale revenues from sales to non-affiliates will vary depending on the market cost of available energy compared to the cost of the Company and Southern Company system-owned generation, demand for energy within the Southern Company service territory, and availability of Southern Company system generation.
Revenues from unit power sales decreased $15.9 million, or 18.9%, in 2009 primarily due to a 26.0% decrease in kilowatt-hour (KWH) energy sales due to the recessionary economy and generally unfavorable weather. Revenues from unit power sales increased $18.2 million, or 27.4%, in 2008 driven by higher fuel rates and an 8.2% increase in the kilowatt-hour (KWH)KWH energy sales primarily related to sales by the Company’s generating units when other Southern Company system units were unavailable. Revenues from unit power sales remained relatively constant in 2007 and 2006.2007. Revenues from other non-affiliated sales decreased by $158.3 million, or 32.7%, in 2009, increased $12.7 million, or 2.7%, in 2008, and decreased $9.6 million, or 2.0%, in 2007,2007. The decrease in 2009 was due to lower natural gas prices and increased $21.0 million, or 4.6%,a 49.7% decrease in 2006.KWH sales due to the recessionary economy and generally unfavorable weather. The increase in 2008 was primarily driven by the fuel component within non-affiliate wholesale prices which has increased with the effects of higher fuel and purchased power costs. This increase was partially offset by a 9.8% decrease in KWH energy sales and decreased contributions from the emissions allowance component of market-based wholesale rates. The decrease in 2007 was primarily due to a decrease in revenues from large territorial contracts resulting from lower emissions allowance prices. The increase in 2006 was due to a 0.6% increase in the demand for KWH energy sales due to a new contract with an electrical membership corporation that went into effect in April 2006.
Wholesale revenues from sales to affiliated companies within the Southern Company system will vary from year to year depending on demand and the availability and cost of generating resources at each company. These affiliated sales and purchases are made in accordance with the Intercompany Interchange Contract (IIC), as approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). In 2009, wholesale revenues from sales to affiliates decreased 60.9% due to lower natural gas prices and a 32.2% decrease in KWH sales due to the recessionary economy and generally unfavorable weather. In 2008, KWH energy sales to affiliated companies decreased 28.8% while revenues from sales to affiliates increased 3.0%. In 2007, KWH energy sales to affiliates decreased 5.0% while revenues from sales to affiliates increased 10.0%. The revenue increases in 2008 and 2007 were primarily due to the increased cost of fuel and other marginal generation components of the rates. In 2006, KWH energy sales to affiliates increased 8.5% due to higher demand. However, revenues from these sales decreased by 8.3% in 2006 due to reduced cost per KWH delivered. These transactions do not have a significant impact on earnings since this energy is generally sold at marginal cost.
Other operating revenues remained relatively flat in 2009. Other operating revenues increased $12.3 million, or 4.8%, in 2008 primarily due to a $6.7 million increase in revenues from outdoor lighting resulting from a 15.8% increase in lighting customers and a $7.6 million increase in customer fees resulting from higher rates that went into effect in 2008, partially offset by a $2.2 million decrease in equipment rentals revenue. Other operating revenues increased $22.2 million, or 9.4%, in 2007 primarily due to an $11.6 million increase in transmission revenues due to the increased usage of the Company’s transmission system by non-affiliated companies, a $7.9 million increase in revenues from outdoor lighting activities due to a 10% increase in the number of lighting customers, and a $4.0 million increase from customer fees. Other operating revenues increased $24.6 million, or 11.6%, in 2006 primarily due to increased revenues of $14.1 million related to work performed for the other owners of the integrated transmission system in the State of Georgia, higher customer fees of $4.6 million, and higher outdoor lighting revenues of $6.1 million.

II-178II-175


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Energy Sales
Changes in revenues are influenced heavily by the change in volume of energy sold from year to year. KWH sales for 20082009 and the percent change by year were as follows:
                                
 KWH Percent Change KWH Percent Change
 2008 2008 2007 2006 2009 2009 2008 2007
 (in billions)  (in billions) 
Residential 26.4  (1.6)%  2.4%  2.7% 26.3  (0.5)%  (1.6)%  2.4%
Commercial 33.0 0.0 2.9 2.5  32.6  (1.4) 0.0 2.9 
Industrial 24.2  (5.2)  (0.3)  (1.0) 21.8  (9.7)  (5.2)  (0.3)
Other 0.7  (3.8) 5.6  (10.5) 0.7 0.1  (3.8) 5.6 
Total retail 84.3  (2.1) 1.8 1.4  81.4  (3.5)  (2.1) 1.8 
  
Wholesale  
Non-affiliates 9.8  (7.8)  (1.0) 0.9  5.2  (46.6)  (7.8)  (1.0)
Affiliates 3.7  (28.8)  (5.0) 8.5  2.5  (32.2)  (28.8)  (5.0)
Total wholesale 13.5  (14.7)  (2.3) 3.4  7.7  (42.7)  (14.7)  (2.3)
Total energy sales 97.8  (4.0)%  1.1%  1.7% 89.1  (8.9)%  (4.0)%  1.1%
Changes in retail energy sales are comprised of changes in electricity usage by customers, changes in weather, and changes in the number of customers.
Residential KWH sales decreased 0.5% in 2009 compared to 2008 primarily due to slightly less favorable weather, partially offset by an increase of 0.2% in residential customers. Commercial and industrial KWH sales decreased 1.4% and 9.7%, respectively, in 2009 compared to 2008 due to the recessionary economy. During 2009, there was a broad decline in demand across all industrial segments, most significantly in the chemical, primary metals, textiles, and stone, clay, and glass sectors.
Residential KWH sales decreased 1.6% in 2008 compared to 2007 primarily due to less favorable weather, partially offset by a 0.7% increase in residential customers. Commercial KWH sales remained flat in 2008 compared to 2007 despite a 0.2% increase in commercial customers. Industrial KWH sales decreased 5.2% in 2008 over 2007 primarily due to reduced demand and closures within the textile and primary and fabricated metal industries, which were a result of the slowing economy that worsened during the fourth quarter 2008.
Residential KWH sales increased 2.4% in 2007 over 2006 due to favorable weather and a 1.3% increase in residential customers. Commercial KWH sales increased 2.9% in 2007 over 2006 primarily due to favorable weather and a 0.3% increase in commercial customers. Industrial KWH sales decreased 0.3% primarily due to reduced demand and closures within the textile industry; however, this was partially offset by a 2.9% increase in the number of industrial customers.
Residential KWH sales increased 2.7% in 2006 over 2005 due to customer growth of 1.9% and more favorable weather. Commercial KWH sales increased 2.5% in 2006 over 2005 due to customer growth of 2.0% and a reclassification of customers from industrial to commercial to be consistent with the rate structure approved by the Georgia Public Service Commission (PSC). Industrial KWH sales decreased 1.0% due to a 3.4% decrease in the number of customers as a result of this reclassification.

II-179II-176


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Fuel and Purchased Power Expenses
Fuel costs constitute the single largest expense for the Company. The mix of fuel sources for generation of electricity is determined primarily by demand, the unit cost of fuel consumed, and the availability of generating units. Additionally, the Company purchases a portion of its electricity needs from the wholesale market. Details of the Company’s electricity generated and purchased were as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
Total generation(billions of KWHs)
 80.8 87.0 83.7  72.4 80.8 87.0 
Total purchased power(billions of KWHs)
 21.3 18.9 21.9  20.4 21.3 18.9 
Sources of generation(percent) -
  
Coal 74 75 75  67 74 75 
Nuclear 19 18 18  21 19 18 
Gas 6 7 6  10 6 7 
Hydro 1  1  2 1  
Cost of fuel, generated(cents per net KWH) -
  
Coal 3.44 2.87 2.58  4.12 3.44 2.87 
Nuclear 0.51 0.51 0.47  0.55 0.51 0.51 
Gas 6.90 6.28 5.76  5.30 6.90 6.28 
Average cost of fuel, generated(cents per net KWH)
 3.11 2.68 2.39 
Average cost of fuel, generated(cents per net KWH)*
 3.48 3.11 2.68 
Average cost of purchased power(cents per net KWH)
 8.10 7.27 6.38  6.06 8.10 7.27 
*Fuel includes fuel purchased by the Company for tolling agreements where power is generated by the provider and is included in purchased power when determining the average cost of purchased power.
Fuel and purchased power expenses were $3.7 billion in 2009, a decrease of $521.7 million, or 12.4%, below prior year costs. This decrease was due to a $371.2 million decrease related to fewer KWHs generated and purchased primarily due to lower customer demand as a result of the recessionary economy and a $150.5 million decrease in the average cost of purchased power, partially offset by an increase in the average cost of fuel.
Fuel and purchased power expenses were $4.2 billion in 2008, an increase of $526.6 million, or 14.3%, above prior year costs. Substantially all of this increase was due to the higher average cost of fuel and purchased power.
Fuel and purchased power expenses were $3.7 billion in 2007, an increase of $312.9 million, or 9.3%, above prior year costs. This increase was driven by a $414.5 million increase in total energy costs due to the higher average cost of fuel and purchased power, partially offset by a $101.6 million reduction due to fewer KWHs purchased.
Fuel and purchased power expenses were $3.4 billion in 2006, an increase of $124.4 million, or 3.8%, above prior year costs. This increase was driven by a $146.1 million increase relatedCoal prices continued to higher KWHs generated and purchased, partially offset by a $21.7 million decrease in the average cost of fuel and purchased power.
Over the last several years, coal prices have beenbe influenced by a worldwide increase in demand from developing countries, as well as increases inincreased mining and fuel transportation costs. In the first half of 2008,While coal prices reached unprecedented high levels primarily due to increased demand following more moderate pricing in 20062008, the recessionary economy pushed prices downward in 2009. However, the lower prices did not fully offset the higher priced coal already in inventory and 2007. Despite these fluctuations, fuel inventories have been adequate and fuel supply markets have been sufficient to meet expected fuel requirements.under long-term contract. Demand for natural gas in the United States also increased in 2007 andwas affected by the first half of 2008. However,recessionary economy leading to significantly lower natural gas supplies increased in the last half of 2008 as a result of increased production and higher storage levels due in part to weak industrial demand. Both coal and natural gas prices moderated in the second half of 2008 as the result of a recessionary economy.prices. During 2008,2009, uranium prices continued to moderate from the highs set during 2007. While worldwide uraniumWorldwide production levels appear to have increased slightly since 2007,in 2009; however, secondary supplies and inventories were still required to meet worldwide reactor demand.
Fuel expenses generally do not affect net income, since they are offset by fuel revenues under the Company’s fuel cost recovery provisions. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “PSC MATTERSMatters — Fuel Cost Recovery” herein for additional information.

II-180II-177


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Other Operations and Maintenance Expenses
In 2009, other operations and maintenance expenses decreased $86.7 million, or 5.5%, compared to 2008. The decrease was due to a $46.1 million decrease in power generation, a $28.0 million decrease in transmission and distribution, and a $31.5 million decrease in customer accounting, service, and sales, most of which are related to cost containment activities in an effort to offset the effects of the recessionary economy.
In 2008, other operations and maintenance expenses increased $19.2 million, or 1.2%, compared to 2007. The increase was primarily the result of a $14.7 million increase in the accrual for property damage approved under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, a $14.6 million increase in scheduled outages and maintenance for fossil generating plants, and a $22.0 million increase related to meter reading, records and collections, and uncollectible account expenses. These increases were partially offset by decreases of $24.7 million related to the timing of transmission and distribution operations and maintenance and $7.4 million related to medical, pension, and other employee benefits.
In 2007, the change in other operations and maintenance expenses was immaterial compared to 2006.
In 2006, other operations and maintenance expenses decreased $11.0 million, or 0.7%, from the prior year. Maintenance for generating plants decreased $20.0 million in 2006 as a result of fewer scheduled outages than 2005, offset by an increase of $18.2 million for transmission and distribution expenses related to load dispatching and overhead line maintenance. Also contributing to the decrease were lower employee benefit expenses related to medical benefits and lower workers compensation expense of $23.2 million, partially offset by lower pension income of $13.7 million.
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation and amortization increased $18.2 million, or 2.9%, in 2009 compared to the prior year primarily due to additional plant in service related to transmission, distribution, and environmental projects, partially offset by the amortization of $41.4 million of the regulatory liability related to other cost of removal obligations as authorized by the Georgia PSC. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “PSC Matters — Rate Plans” herein, Note 1 to the financial statements under “Depreciation and Amortization,” and Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Rate Plans” for additional information.
Depreciation and amortization increased $125.8 million, or 24.6%, in 2008 compared to the prior year primarily due to an increase in plant in service related to completed transmission, distribution, and environmental projects, changes in depreciation rates effective January 1, 2008 approved under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, and the expiration of amortization related to a regulatory liability for purchased power costs under the terms of the retail rate plan for the three years ended December 31, 2007 (2004 Retail Rate Plan).
Depreciation and amortization increased $12.4 million, or 2.5%, in 2007 compared to the prior year primarily due to a 3.4% increase in plant in service related to transmission, distribution, and environmental projects from the prior year. This increase was partially offset by a decrease in amortization of the regulatory liability for purchased power costs as described above.
Depreciation and amortization decreased $27.9 million, or 5.3%, in 2006 compared to the prior year due to the scheduled decrease in amortization related to the regulatory liability for purchased power costs as described above. This decrease was partially offset by a $15.9 million, or 3.2%, increase in depreciation in 2006 over 2005 due to an increase in plant in service. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Rate Plans” for additional information.
Taxes Other Than Income Taxes
In 2009, the increase in taxes other than income taxes was immaterial. In 2008, taxes other than income taxes increased $25.1 million, or 8.6%, from the prior year primarily due to higher municipal franchise fees resulting from retail revenue increases during 2008. Taxes other than income taxes decreased $7.7 million, or 2.6%, in 2007 primarily due to the resolution of a dispute regarding property taxes in Monroe County, Georgia. Taxes other than income taxes increased $22.8 million, or 8.3%, in 2006 primarily due to higher property taxes of $13.3 million as a result of an increase in property values and higher municipal gross receipts taxes of $9.1 million as a result of increased retail operating revenues.
Allowance for Equity Funds Used During Construction Equity
AllowanceIn 2009, the increase in allowance for equity funds used during construction (AFUDC) equity was immaterial. AFUDC equity increased $27.1 million, or 39.8%, in 2008 and $36.7 million, or 116.3%, in 2007 primarily due to the increase in construction work in progress balances related to ongoing environmental and transmission projects, as well as three combined cycle generating units at Plant McDonough. AFUDC increased $36.7 million, or 116.3%, in 2007 primarily due to the increase in the Company’s construction work in progress balance related to ongoing transmission, distribution, and environmental projects. AFUDC remained relatively constant in 2006 when compared to 2005.
Interest Expense, Net of Amounts Capitalized
In 2009, interest expense, net of amounts capitalized increased $40.5 million, or 11.7%, primarily due to an increase in long-term debt levels resulting from the issuance of additional senior notes and pollution control bonds to fund the Company’s ongoing construction program. The increase in interest expense in 2008 was immaterial. Interest expense increased $25.5 million, or 8.0%, in 2007 primarily due to a 13.9% increase in long-term debt levels due to the issuance of additional senior notes and pollution control revenue bonds. Interest expense increased $22.5 million, or 7.6%, in 2006 primarily due to generally higher interest rates on variable rate debt and commercial paper, the issuance of additional senior notes, and higher average balances of short-term debt.

II-181II-178


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Other Income (Expense), Net
Other income (expense), net increased $7.5 million, or 80.8%, in 2009 primarily related to $2.0 million and $0.9 million increases in customer contracting and income resulting from purchases by large commercial and industrial customers of hedges against market-response rates, respectively, and a decrease of $2.4 million in donations. Other income (expense), net decreased $24.0 million, or 163.0%, in 2008 primarily due to a $12.9 million change in classification of revenues related to a residential pricing program to base retail revenues in 2008 as ordered by the Georgia PSC under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, as well as decreased revenues of $7.3 million and $2.6 million related to non-operating rental income and customer contracting, respectively. Other income (expense), net increased $5.8 million, or 66.5%, in 2007 primarily due to $4.0 million from land and timber sales. Other income (expense), net increased $1.9 million, or 26.7%, in 2006 primarily due to reduced expenses of $2.9 million and $5.0 million related to the employee stock ownership plan and charitable donations, respectively, and increased revenues of $3.6 million, $5.4 million, and $3.4 million related to a residential pricing program, customer contracting, and customer facilities charges, respectively. These increases were partially offset by net financial gains on gas hedges of $18.6 million in 2005.
Income Taxes
Income taxes decreased $77.5 million, or 15.9%, in 2009 primarily due to lower pre-tax income. Income taxes increased $70.0 million, or 16.8%, in 2008 primarily due to increased pre-tax net income and the 2007 Tallulah Gorge donation. These increases wereThis increase was partially offset by an increase in AFUDC equity, which is non-taxable, as well as additional state tax credits and an increase in the federal production activities deduction. Income taxes decreased $24.8 million, or 5.6%, in 2007 primarily due to state and federal deductions for the Company’s donation of 2,200 acres in the Tallulah Gorge area to the State of Georgia and higher federal manufacturing deductions. In 2006, income taxes decreased $5.1 million, or 1.1%, primarily due to the recognition of state tax credits. See Note 5 to the financial statements for additional information.
Effects of Inflation
The Company is subject to rate regulation that is generally based on the recovery of historical and projected costs. When historical costs are included, or when inflation exceeds projected costs used in rate regulation or market-based prices, theThe effects of inflation can create an economic loss since the recovery of costs could be in dollars that have less purchasing power. In addition, income tax laws are based on historical costs. While the inflation rate has been relatively low in recent years, it continues to have anAny adverse effect of inflation on the Company becauseCompany’s results of the large investment in utility plant with long economic lives. Conventional accounting for historical cost doesoperations has not recognize this economic loss or the partially offsetting gain that arises through financing facilities with fixed-money obligations such as long-term debt, preferred securities, preferred stock, and preference stock. Any recognition of inflation by regulatory authorities is reflected in the rate of return allowed in the Company’s approved electric rates.been substantial.
FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL
General
The Company operates as a vertically integrated utility providing electricity to retail customers within its traditional service area located within the State of Georgia and to wholesale customers in the Southeast. Prices for electricity provided by the Company to retail customers are set by the Georgia PSC under cost-based regulatory principles. Prices for electricity relating to wholesale electricity sales, interconnecting transmission lines, and the exchange of electric power are setregulated by the FERC. Retail rates and revenues are reviewed and may be adjusted periodically withwithin certain limitations. See ACCOUNTING POLICIES — “Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates — Electric Utility Regulation” herein and Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters” and “FERC Matters” for additional information about regulatory matters.
The results of operations for the past three years are not necessarily indicative of future earnings potential. The level of the Company’s future earnings depends on numerous factors that affect the opportunities, challenges, and risks of the Company’s business of selling electricity. These factors include the Company’s ability to maintain a constructive regulatory environment that continues to allow for the recovery of all prudently incurred costs during a time of increasing costs. Future earnings in the near term will depend, in part, upon maintaining energy sales, during the current economic downturn, which is subject to a number of factors. These factors include weather, competition, new energy contracts with neighboring utilities, energy conservation practiced by customers, the price of electricity, the price elasticity of demand, and the rate of economic growth or decline in the Company’s service area. Recent recessionaryRecessionary conditions have negatively impacted sales growth.and are expected to continue to have a negative impact, particularly to industrial and commercial customers. The timing and extent of the economic recovery will impact future earnings.

II-182


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Environmental Matters
Compliance costs related to the Clean Air Act and other environmental statutes and regulations could affect earnings if such costs cannot continue to be fully recovered in rates on a timely basis. Environmental compliance spending over the next several years may exceed amounts estimated. Some of the factors driving the potential for such an increase are higher commodity costs, market demand for labor, and scope additions and clarifications. The timing, specific requirements, and estimated costs could also change as environmental statutes and regulations are adopted or modified. Under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, an environmental compliance cost recovery (ECCR) tariff was implemented on January 1, 2008 to allow for the recovery of most of the costs related to environmental controls mandated by state and federal regulation scheduled for completion between 2008 and 2010. The Company has also requested that the Georgia PSC certify the construction of environmental controls for Plants Branch and Hammond. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Rate Plans” for additional information.

II-179


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
New Source Review Actions
In November 1999, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) brought a civil action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, including the Company, alleging that these subsidiaries had violated the New Source Review (NSR) provisions of the Clean Air Act and related state laws at certain coal-fired generating facilities includingfacilities. The action was filed concurrently with the Company’s Plants Bowen and Scherer.issuance of a notice of violation of the NSR provisions to the Company. After Alabama Power was dismissed from the original action, for jurisdictional reasons, the EPA filed a separate action in January 2001 against Alabama Power in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. In these lawsuits, the EPA allegedalleges that NSR violations occurred at eight coal-fired generating facilities operated by Alabama Power and the Company. The civil actions request penalties and injunctive relief, including an order requiring installation of the best available control technology at the affected units. The original action, now solely against the Company, has been administratively closed since the spring of 2001, and the case has not been reopened.
In June 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama entered a consent decree between Alabama Power and the EPA, resolving a portion of the Alabama Power lawsuit relating to the alleged NSR violations at Plant Miller. The consent decree required Alabama Power to pay $100,000 to resolve the government’s claim for a civil penalty and to donate $4.9 million of sulfur dioxide emission allowances to a nonprofit charitable organization. It also formalized specific emissions reductions to be accomplished by Alabama Power, consistent with other Clean Air Act programs that require emissions reductions. In August 2006, the district court in Alabama granted Alabama Power’s motion for summary judgment and entered final judgment in favor of Alabama Power on the EPA’s claims related to all of the remaining plants: Plants Barry, Gaston, Gorgas, and Greene County.
The plaintiffs appealed the district court’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, where the appeal was stayed, pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in a similar case against Duke Energy. The Supreme Court issued its decision in the Duke Energy case in April 2007, and in December 2007, the Eleventh Circuit vacated the district court’s decision in the Alabama Power case and remanded the case back to the district court for consideration of the legal issues in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Duke Energy case. On July 24, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama granted partial summary judgment in favor of Alabama Power with respect to its other affected units regarding the proper legal test for determining whether projects are routine maintenance, repair, and replacement and therefore are excluded from NSR permitting. The decision did not resolve the case.case, which remains ongoing.
The Company believes that it complied with applicable laws and the EPA regulations and interpretations in effect at the time the work in question took place. The Clean Air Act authorizes maximum civil penalties of $25,000 to $37,500 per day, per violation at each generating unit, depending on the date of the alleged violation. An adverse outcome in this matter could require substantial capital expenditures or affect the timing of currently budgeted capital expenditures that cannot be determined at this time and could possibly require payment of substantial penalties. Such expenditures could affect future results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates. The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Carbon Dioxide Litigation
New York Case
In July 2004, three environmental groups and attorneys general from eight states, each outside of Southern Company’s service territory, and the corporation counsel for New York City filed complaints in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against Southern Company and four other electric power companies. The complaints allege that the companies’ emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, contribute to global warming, which the plaintiffs assert is a public nuisance. Under common law

II-183


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
public and private nuisance theories, the plaintiffs seek a judicial order (1) holding each defendant jointly and severally liable for creating, contributing to, and/or maintaining global warming and (2) requiring each of the defendants to cap its emissions of carbon dioxide and then reduce those emissions by a specified percentage each year for at least a decade. The plaintiffs have not, however, requested that damages be awarded in connection with their claims. Southern Company believes these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. In September 2005, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted Southern Company’s and the other defendants’ motions to dismiss these cases. The plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in October 2005 but no decision has been issued. Theand, on September 21, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the district court’s ruling, vacating the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claim, and remanding the case to the district court. On November 5, 2009, the defendants, including Southern Company, sought rehearing en banc, and the court’s ruling is subject to potential appeal. Therefore, the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Kivalina Case
OnIn February 26, 2008, the Native Village of Kivalina and the City of Kivalina filed a suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against several electric utilities (including Southern Company), several oil companies, and a coal company. The plaintiffs are the governing bodies of an Inupiat village in Alaska. The plaintiffs contend that the village is being destroyed by erosion allegedly caused by global warming that the plaintiffs attribute to emissions of greenhouse gases by the defendants. The plaintiffs assert claims for public and private nuisance and contend that some of the defendants have acted in concert and are therefore jointly and severally liable for the plaintiffs’ damages. The suit seeks damages for lost property values and for the cost of relocating the village, which is alleged to be $95 million to $400 million. On June 30, 2008, all defendants filed motions to dismiss this case. Southern Company believes that these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. On September 30, 2009, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss the case based on lack of jurisdiction and ruled the claims were barred by the political question doctrine and by the plaintiffs’ failure to establish the standard for determining that the

II-180


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
defendants’ conduct caused the injury alleged. On November 5, 2009, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit challenging the district court’s order dismissing the case. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Other Litigation
Common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas emissions have become more frequent, and courts have recently determined that private parties and states have standing to bring such claims. For example, on October 16, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi’s dismissal of private party claims against certain oil, coal, chemical, and utility companies alleging damages as a result of Hurricane Katrina. In reversing the dismissal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that plaintiffs have standing to assert their nuisance, trespass, and negligence claims and none of these claims are barred by the political question doctrine. The Company is not currently a party to this litigation but was named as a defendant in an amended complaint which was rendered moot in August 2007 by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi when such court dismissed the original matter. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Environmental Statutes and Regulations
General
The Company’s operations are subject to extensive regulation by state and federal environmental agencies under a variety of statutes and regulations governing environmental media, including air, water, and land resources. Applicable statutes include the Clean Air Act; the Clean Water Act; the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; the Toxic Substances Control Act; the Emergency Planning & Community Right-to-Know Act; the Endangered Species Act; and related federal and state regulations. Compliance with these environmental requirements involves significant capital and operating costs, a major portion of which is expected to be recovered through existing ratemaking provisions. Through 2008,2009, the Company had invested approximately $3.1$3.5 billion in capital projects to comply with these requirements, with annual totals of $440 million, $689 million, and $856 million for 2009, 2008, and $352 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. The Company expects that capital expenditures to ensure compliance with existing and new statutes and regulations will be an additional $472$259 million, $334$350 million, and $399$600 million for 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2011,2012, respectively. The Company’s compliance strategy can be affected by changes to existing environmental laws, statutes, and regulations,regulations; the cost, availability, and existing inventory of emission allowances,emissions allowances; and the Company’s fuel mix. Environmental costs that are known and estimable at this time are included in capital expenditures discussed under FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY — “Capital Requirements and Contractual Obligations” herein.
Compliance with any new federal or state legislation or regulations related to global climate change, air quality, coal combustion byproducts, including coal ash, or other environmental and health concerns could also significantly affect the Company. Although new or revised environmental legislation or regulations could affect many areas of the Company’s operations, the full impact of any such changes cannot be determined at this time.
Air Quality
Compliance with the Clean Air Act and resulting regulations has been and will continue to be a significant focus for the Company. Through 2008,2009, the Company had spent approximately $2.8$3.2 billion in reducing sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions and in monitoring emissions pursuant to the Clean Air Act. Additional controls are currently being installed at several plants to further reduce air emissions, maintain compliance with existing regulations, and meet new requirements.
In 2004, theThe EPA designated nonattainment areas underregulates ground level ozone through implementation of an eight-hour ozone air quality standard. AreasA 20-county area within metropolitan Atlanta is the only location within the Company’s service area that wereis currently designated as nonattainment underfor the standard, which could require additional reductions in NOx emissions from power plants. In March 2008, however, the EPA issued a final rule establishing a more stringent eight-hour ozone standard, included Macon and a 20-county area within metropolitan Atlanta. The Macon area has since been redesignated as an attainment area byon January 6, 2010, the EPA proposed further reductions in the standard. The EPA is expected to finalize the revised standard in August 2010 and a maintenance planrequire state implementation plans for any nonattainment areas by December 2013. The revised eight-hour ozone standard is expected to address future exceedancesresult in designation of new nonattainment areas within the standard has been approved. A state plan for bringing the Atlanta area into attainment with this standard was due to the EPA in 2007; however, in December 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the EPA rulesCompany’s service territory.

II-184II-181


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
designed to provide states with the guidance necessary to develop such plans. State plans could require additional reductions in NOx emissions from power plants. On March 12, 2008, the EPA issued a final rule establishing a more stringent eight-hour ozone standard which will likely result in designation of new nonattainment areas within the Company’s service territory. The EPA is expected to publish those designations in 2010 and require state implementation plans for any nonattainment areas by 2013.
During 2005, the EPA’s annual fine particulate matter nonattainment designations became effective for several areas within the Company’s service area. State plans for addressing the nonattainment designations for this standard were due by April 5, 2008 but have not been finalized. These state plans could require further reductions in SO2 and NOx emissions from power plants.
On December 8, 2009, the EPA also proposed revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for SO2. The EPA issuedis expected to finalize the final Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) in March 2005. This cap-and-trade rule addresses power plantrevised SO2 and NOx emissions that were found to contribute to nonattainment of the eight-hour ozone and fine particulate matter standardsstandard in downwind states. June 2010.
Twenty-eight eastern states, including the State of Georgia, are subject to the requirements of the rule.Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). The rule calls for additional reductions of NOx and/or SO2 to be achieved in two phases, 2009/2010 and 2015. OnIn July 11, 2008 in response to petitions brought by certain states and regulated industries challenging particular aspects of CAIR,December 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a decision vacatingdecisions invalidating certain aspects of CAIR, in its entirety and remanding it to the EPA for further action consistent with its opinion. On December 23, 2008, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit altered its July decision in response to a rehearing petition and remanded CAIR to the EPA without vacatur, thereby leavingbut left CAIR compliance requirements in place while the EPA develops a revised rule. The State of Georgia has completed plansits plan to implement CAIR, and has approved a “multi-pollutant rule” that requires plant-specific emission controls on all but the smallest generating units in Georgia to be installed according to a schedule set forth in the rule. The rule is designed to ensureemissions reductions in emissions of SO2, NOx, and mercury in Georgia.Emission reductions are thus being accomplished by the installation of emissionemissions controls at certain of the Company’s coal-fired facilities and/or by the purchase of emissionemissions allowances. The full impact of the court’s remand and the outcome of the EPA’s future rulemakingEPA is expected to issue a proposed CAIR replacement rule in response cannot be determined at this time.July 2010.
The Clean Air Visibility Rule (formerly called the Regional Haze Rule) was finalized in July 2005. The2005, with a goal of this rule is to restorerestoring natural visibility conditions in certain areas (primarily national parks and wilderness areas) by 2064. The rule involves (1) the application of Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) to certain sources built between 1962 and 1977, and (2) the application of any additional emissions reductions which may be deemed necessary for each designated area to achieve reasonable progress by 2018 toward the natural conditions goal. Thereafter,goal by 2018 and for each 10-year planningten-year period additional emissions reductions will be required to continue to demonstrate reasonable progress in each area during that period.thereafter. For power plants, the Clean Air Visibility Rule allows states to determine that the CAIR satisfies BART requirements for SO2 and NOx. Extensive studies were performed for each, and no additional controls beyond CAIR are anticipated to be necessary at any of the Company’s affected units to demonstrate that additional particulate matter controls are not necessary under BART. At the request of thefacilities. The State of Georgia additional analyses were performed for certain units in Georgia to demonstrate that no additional SO2 controls were required to demonstrate reasonable progress. States have completed or areis currently completing its implementation plans that contain strategiesplan for BART compliance and any other measures required to achieve the first phase of reasonable progress.
The EPA is currently developing a Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) rule for coal and oil-fired electric generating units, which will likely address numerous Hazardous Air Pollutants, including mercury. In March 2005, the EPA issued the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), a cap and trade program for the reduction of mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants. In February 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the CAMR. In a separate proceeding in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the EPA entered into a proposed consent decree that requires the EPA to issue a proposed MACT rule by March 16, 2011 and a final rule by November 16, 2011.
In February 2004, the EPA finalized the Industrial Boiler (IB) MACT rule, which imposed limits on hazardous air pollutants from industrial boilers, including biomass boilers. Compliance with the final rule was scheduled to begin in September 2007; however, in response to challenges to the final rule, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the IB MACT rule in its entirety in July 2007 and ordered the EPA to develop a new IB MACT rule. In September 2009, the deadline to promulgate a proposed rule was extended from July 15, 2009 to April 15, 2010, with a final rule required by December 16, 2010. The EPA is currently developing the new rule and may change the methodology to determine the MACT limits for industrial boilers.
The impacts of the eight-hour ozone nonattainment designations,standards, the fine particulate matter nonattainment designations, and future revisions to CAIR, the SO2 standard, the Clean Air Visibility Rule, and the MACT rules for electric generating units and industrial boilers on the Company cannot be determined at this time and will depend on the specific provisions of the final rules, resolution of any pending legal challenges, and the development and implementation of rules at the state level. However, these additional regulations could result in significant additional compliance costs that could affect future unit retirement and replacement decisions and results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates. As a result of these uncertainties, the Company has delayed any further construction activities related to both the installation of emissions control equipment at Plants Branch and Yates and the conversion of Plant Mitchell from coal-fired to biomass-fired.
The Company has developed and continually updates a comprehensive environmental compliance strategy to assess compliance obligations associated with the continuing and new environmental requirements discussed above. As part of this strategy, the Company plans to install additionalhas already installed a number of SO2and NOx emissionemissions controls and plans to install additional controls within the next several years to ensure continued compliance with applicable air quality requirements.
In March 2005, the EPA published the final Clean Air Mercury Rule,addition, most units in Georgia are required to install specific emissions controls according to a cap-and-trade program for the reduction of mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants. The final Clean Air Mercury Rule was challengedschedule set forth in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The petitioners alleged that the EPA was not authorizedstate’s Multipollutant Rule, which is designed to establish a cap-and-trade program for mercuryreduce emissions and instead the EPA must establish maximum achievable control technology standards for coal-fired electric utility steam generating units. On February 8, 2008, the court ruled in favor of the petitioners and vacated the Clean Air Mercury Rule. The Company’s overall environmental compliance strategy relies primarily on a combination of SO2 and, NOx controls to reduce, and mercury emissions. Any significant changes in the strategy will depend on the outcome of any appeals and/or future federal and state rulemakings. Future rulemakings necessitated by the court’s decision could require emission reductions more stringent than those required by the Clean Air Mercury Rule.Georgia.

II-185II-182


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Water Quality
In July 2004, the EPA published its final technology-based regulations under the Clean Water Act for the purpose of reducingto reduce impingement and entrainment of fish, shellfish, and other forms of aquatic life at existing power plant cooling water intake structures. The rules require baseline biological information and, perhaps, installation of fish protection technology near some intake structures at existing power plants. In January 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit overturned and remanded several provisions of the rule, including the use of cost-benefit analysis toin the EPA for revisions. The decision has beenrule was ultimately appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. On April 1, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the EPA could consider costs in arriving at its standards and in providing variances from those standards for existing intake structures. The EPA is now in the process of revising the regulations. While the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision may ultimately result in greater flexibility for demonstrating compliance with the standards, the full impactscope of thesethe regulations will depend on subsequent legal proceedings, further rulemaking by the EPA the results of studies and analyses performed as part of the rules’ implementation, and the actual requirements established by state regulatory agencies and, therefore, cannot be determined at this time.
On December 28, 2009, the EPA announced its determination that revision of the current effluent guidelines for steam electric power plants is warranted and proposed a plan to adopt such revisions by 2013. New wastewater treatment requirements are expected and may result in the installation of additional controls on certain of the Company’s facilities. The impact of revised guidelines will depend on the studies conducted in connection with the rulemaking, as well as the specific requirements of the final rule, and, therefore, cannot be determined at this time.
Environmental Remediation
The Company must comply with other environmental laws and regulations that cover the handling and disposal of waste and releases of hazardous substances. Under these various laws and regulations, the Company could incur substantial costs to clean up properties. The Company conducts studies to determine the extent of any required cleanup and has recognized in its financial statements the costs to clean up known sites. Amounts for cleanup and ongoing monitoring costs were not material for any year presented. The Company may be liable for some or all required cleanup costs for additional sites that may require environmental remediation. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Environmental Matters Environmental Remediation” for additional information.
Global Climate IssuesCoal Combustion Byproducts
Federal legislative proposals that would impose mandatory requirements relatedThe EPA is currently evaluating whether additional regulation of coal combustion byproducts is merited under federal solid and hazardous waste laws. The EPA has collected information from the electric utility industry on surface impoundment safety and conducted on-site inspections at two facilities of the Company as part of its evaluation. The Company has a routine and robust inspection program in place to greenhouse gas emissions and renewable energy standards continueensure the integrity of its coal ash surface impoundments. The EPA is expected to be strongly consideredissue a proposal regarding additional regulation of coal combustion byproducts in Congress, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has been identified as a high priority by the current Administration.early 2010. The ultimate outcomeimpact of these proposalsadditional regulations on the Company will depend on the specific provisions of the final rule and cannot be determined at this time; however, mandatory restrictionstime. However, additional regulations of coal combustion byproducts could have a significant impact on the Company’s greenhouse gas emissionsmanagement, beneficial use, and disposal of such byproducts and could result in significant additional compliance costs that could affect future unit retirement and replacement decisions and results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates. As a result of these uncertainties, the Company has delayed any further construction activities related to both the installation of emissions control equipment at Plants Branch and Yates and the conversion of Plant Mitchell from coal-fired to biomass-fired.
Global Climate Issues
Federal legislative proposals that would impose mandatory requirements related to greenhouse gas emissions, renewable energy standards, and energy efficiency standards continue to be considered in Congress, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has been identified as a high priority by the current Administration. On June 26, 2009, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES), which would impose mandatory greenhouse gas restrictions through implementation of a cap and trade program, a renewable energy standard, and other measures, was passed by the House of Representatives. ACES would require reductions of greenhouse gas emissions on a national basis to a level that is 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, 42% below 2005 levels by 2030, and 83% below 2005 levels by 2050. In addition, ACES would provide for renewable energy standards of 6% by 2012 and 20% by 2020. Similar legislation is being considered by the Senate. The financial and operational impact of such legislation, if enacted, will depend on a variety of factors. These factors include the specific greenhouse gas emissions limits or renewable energy requirements, the timing of implementation of these limits or requirements, the level of emissions allowances allocated and the level that must be purchased, the purchase price of emissions allowances, the development and commercial availability of technologies for renewable energy and for the reduction of emissions, the degree to which offsets may be used for compliance, provisions for cost containment (if any), the impact on coal and natural gas prices, and cost recovery through regulated rates. There can be no assurance that any legislation will be enacted or as to the ultimate form of any legislation. Additional or alternative legislation may be adopted as well.

II-183


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
In April 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the EPA has authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles. On December 15, 2009, the EPA published a final determination, which became effective on January 14, 2010, that certain greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles endanger public health and welfare due to climate change. On September 28, 2009, the EPA published a proposed rule regulating greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles under the Clean Air Act. The EPA has stated that once this rule is currently developing its responseeffective, it will cause carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to this decision. Regulatory decisions that will follow from this response may have implicationsbecome regulated pollutants under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) preconstruction permit program and the Title V operating permit program, which both apply to power plants. As a result, the construction of new facilities or the major modification of existing facilities could trigger the requirement for both newa PSD permit and existingthe installation of the best available control technology for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. The EPA also published a proposed rule governing how these programs would be applied to stationary sources, such asincluding power plants.plants, on October 27, 2009. The EPA has stated that it expects to finalize these proposed rules in March 2010. The ultimate outcome of the endangerment finding and these rulemaking activitiesproposed rules cannot be determined at this time; however, as withtime and will depend on additional regulatory action and any legal challenges.
International climate change negotiations under the current legislative proposals,United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change also continue. A nonbinding agreement was announced during the most recent round of negotiations in December 2009 that included a pledge from both developed and developing countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. The outcome and impact of the international negotiations cannot be determined at this time.
Although the outcome of federal, state, or international initiatives cannot be determined at this time, mandatory restrictions on the Company’s greenhouse gas emissions couldor requirements relating to renewable energy or energy efficiency on the federal or state level are likely to result in significant additional compliance costs, thatincluding significant capital expenditures. These costs could affect future unit retirement and replacement decisions, and could result in the retirement of a significant number of coal-fired generating units. See Item 1 — BUSINESS — “Rate Matters — Integrated Resource Planning” for additional information. Also, additional compliance costs and costs related to unit retirements could affect results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates. Further, higher costs that are recovered through regulated rates could contribute to reduced demand for electricity, which could negatively impact results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition.
In addition, some states are considering or have undertaken actions to regulate and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For example, on June 25, 2008, Florida’s Governor signed comprehensive energy-related legislation that includes authorization for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to adopt rules for a cap-and-trade regulatory program to address greenhouse gastotal carbon dioxide emissions from the fossil fuel-fired electric utilities, conditioned upon their ratificationgenerating units owned by the legislature no sooner than the 2010 legislative session. This legislation also authorizes the Florida PSCCompany were approximately 57  million metric tons. The preliminary estimate of carbon dioxide emissions from these units in 2009 is approximately 48 million metric tons. The level of carbon dioxide emissions from year to adopt a renewable portfolio standard for public utilities, subject to legislative ratification. The impact of any similar state legislationyear will be dependent on the Company will depend onlevel of generation and mix of fuel sources, which is determined primarily by demand, the future development, adoption, legislative ratification, implementation, and potential legal challenges to rules governing greenhouse gas emissions and mandates regarding the useunit cost of renewable energy,fuel consumed, and the ultimate outcome cannot be determined at this time.
International climate change negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change also continue. Current efforts focus on a potential successor to the Kyoto Protocol for the post 2012 timeframe, with a conclusion to this roundavailability of negotiations targeted for the end of 2009. The outcome and impact of the international negotiations cannot be determined at this time.generating units.
The Company is actively evaluating and developing electricconstructing new generating technologiesfacilities with lower greenhouse gas emissions. These include the proposed construction of two additional nuclear generating units at Plant Vogtle and additional renewable energy investments, includingthree combined cycle units at Plant McDonough.
The Company has also proposed the proposed conversion of Plant Mitchell from coal-fired to biomass generation. The Companygeneration and is currently considering additional projects and is pursuing research intoevaluating the costs and viability of other renewable technologies for the State of Georgia.

II-186


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
On February 2, 2010, the Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
FERC Matters
Market-Based Rate Authority
The Company has authorization fromPSC approved the FERCCompany’s request to sell power to non-affiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices. Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based contract with an affiliate.
In December 2004, the FERC initiated a proceeding to assess Southern Company’s generation dominance within its retail service territory. The ability to charge market-based rates in other markets is not an issue in the proceeding. Any new market-based rate sales by the Company in Southern Company’s retail service territory entered into during a 15-month refund period that ended in May 2006 could be subject to refund to a cost-based rate level.
In November 2007, the presiding administrative law judge issued an initial decision regarding the methodology to be used in the generation dominance tests. The proceedings are ongoing. The ultimate outcome of this generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined, but an adverse decision by the FERC in a final order could require the Company to charge cost-based rates for certain wholesale sales in the Southern Company retail service territory, which may be lower than negotiated market-based rates, and could also result in total refunds of up to $5.8 million, plus interest. The Company believes that there is no meritorious basis for an adverse decision in this proceeding and is vigorously defending itself in this matter.
In June 2007, the FERC issued its final rule in Order No. 697 regarding market-based rate authority. The FERC generally retained its current market-based rate standards. Responding to a number of requests for rehearing, the FERC issued Order No. 697-A on April 21, 2008 and Order No. 697-B on December 12, 2008. These orders largely affirmed the FERC’s prior revision and codification of the regulations governing market-based rates for public utilities. In accordance with the orders, Southern Company submitted to the FERC an updated market power analysis on September 2, 2008delay construction activities related to its continued market-based rate authority. The ultimate outcomePlant Mitchell pending the EPA’s anticipated issuance of this matter cannot now be determined.
On October 17, 2008, Southern Company filedregulations associated with the FERC a revised market-based rate (MBR) tariff and a new cost-based rate (CBR) tariff. The revised MBR tariff provides for a “must offer” energy auction whereby Southern Company offers all of its available energy for sale in a day-ahead auction and an hour-ahead auction with reserve prices not to exceed the CBR tariff price, after considering Southern Company’s native load requirements, reliability obligations, and sales commitments to third parties. All sales under the energy auction would be at market clearing prices established under the auction rules. The new CBR tariff provides for a cost-based price for wholesale sales of less than a year. On December 18, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the MBR tariff subject to certain revisions to the auction proposal. On January 21, 2009, Southern Company made a compliance filing that accepted all the conditions of the MBR tariff order. When this order becomes final, Southern Company will have 30 days to implement the wholesale auction. On December 31, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the CBR tariff subject to providing additional information concerning one aspect of the tariff. On January 30, 2009, Southern Company filed a response addressing the FERC inquiry to the CBR tariff order. Implementation of the energy auction in accordance with the MBR tariff order is expected to adequately mitigate going forward any presumption of market power that Southern Company may have in the Southern Company retail service territory. The timing of when the FERC may issue the final orders on the MBR and CBR tariffscoal combustion byproducts and the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Generation Interconnection Agreements
In November 2004, generator company subsidiaries of Tenaska, Inc. (Tenaska), as counterparties to three previously executed interconnection agreements with subsidiaries of Southern Company, including the Company, filed complaints at the FERC requesting that the FERC modify the agreements and that the Company refund a total of $7.9 million previously paid for interconnection facilities. No other similar complaints are pending with the FERC.
In January 2007, the FERC issued an order granting Tenaska’s requested relief. Although the FERC’s order required the modification of Tenaska’s interconnection agreements, under the provisions of the order the Company determined that no refund was payable to Tenaska. The Company requested rehearing asserting that the FERC retroactively applied a new principle to existing interconnection agreements. Tenaska requested rehearing of the FERC’s methodology for determining the amount of refunds. The requested rehearings were denied and the Company and Tenaska have appealed the orders to the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia. The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.

II-187


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
IB MACT rule described previously.
PSC Matters
Rate Plans
In December 2007, the Georgia PSC approved the 2007 Retail Rate Plan for the years 2008 through 2010. Under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, the Company’s earnings will continue to beare evaluated against a retail return on common equity (ROE) range of 10.25% to 12.25%. Two-thirds of any earnings above 12.25% will be applied to rate refunds with the remaining one-third applied to an ECCR tariff. The Company agreed that it will not file for a general base rate increase during this period unless its projected retail ROE falls below 10.25%. Retail base rates increased by approximately $99.7$100 million effective January 1, 2008 to provide for cost recovery of transmission, distribution, generation, and other investments, as well as increased operating costs. In addition, the ECCR tariff was implemented to allow for the recovery of costs for requiredrelated to environmental projects mandated by state and federal regulations. The ECCR tariff increased rates by approximately $222 million effective January 1, 2008.
In connection with the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, the Company agreed that it would not file for a general base rate increase during this period unless its projected retail ROE falls below 10.25%. The economic recession has significantly reduced the Company’s revenues upon which retail rates were set under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan. In June 2009, despite stringent efforts to reduce expenses, the Company’s projected retail ROE for both 2009 and 2010 was below 10.25%. However, in lieu of filing to increase customer rates as

II-184


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
allowed under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, on June 29, 2009, the Company filed a request with the Georgia PSC for an accounting order that would allow the Company to amortize up to $324 million of its regulatory liability related to other cost of removal obligations.
On August 27, 2009, the Georgia PSC approved the accounting order. Under the terms of the accounting order, the Company was entitled to amortize up to one-third of the regulatory liability ($108 million) in 2009, limited to the amount needed to earn no more than a 9.75% retail ROE. For the year ended December 31, 2009, the Company amortized $41 million of the regulatory liability. In addition, the Company may amortize up to two-thirds of the regulatory liability ($216 million) in 2010, limited to the amount needed to earn no more than a 10.15% retail ROE. The Company is required to file a general rate case by July 1, 2010, in response to which the Georgia PSC would be expected to determine whether the 2007 Retail Rate Plan should be continued, modified, or discontinued. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Rate Plans” for additional information.
Fuel Cost Recovery
The Company has established fuel cost recovery rates approved by the Georgia PSC. In June 2006, theThe Georgia PSC approved an increase in the Company’s total annual billings of approximately $400 million.
In February 2007, the Georgia PSC approved an increaseincreases in the Company’s total annual billings of approximately $383 million effective March 1, 2007. On May 20, 2008, the Georgia PSC approved an additional increase of2007 and approximately $222 million effective June 1, 2008. In compliance
On December 15, 2009, the Company filed for a fuel cost recovery increase with the order,Georgia PSC. On February 22, 2010, the Company, the Georgia PSC Public Interest Advocacy Staff, and three customer groups entered into a stipulation to resolve the case, subject to approval by the Georgia PSC (the Stipulation). Under the terms of the Stipulation, the Company’s annual fuel cost recovery billings will increase by approximately $425 million. In addition, the Company will implement an interim fuel rider, which would allow the Company to adjust its fuel cost recovery rates prior to the next fuel case if the under recovered fuel balance exceeds budget by more than $75 million. The Company is required to file a newits next fuel cost recovery ratecase by March 1, 2009. On February 19, 2009, the2011. The Georgia PSC approvedis scheduled to vote on the Company’s request to delayStipulation on March 11, 2010 with the filing of that case until March 13, 2009. The new fuel rates are expected to become effective on JuneApril 1, 2009. 2010. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
As of December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had a totalCompany’s under recovered fuel cost balance oftotaled approximately $764.4$665 million, which if the Stipulation is approved, the Company will recover over 32 months beginning April 1, 2010. Therefore, approximately $373 million of which approximately $223.9 millionthe under recovered regulatory clause revenues for the Company is not included in current rates.deferred charges and other assets at December 31, 2009.
Fuel cost recovery revenues as recorded on the financial statements are adjusted for differences in actual recoverable costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Accordingly, a change in the billing factor has no significant effect on the Company’s revenues or net income, but does impact annual cash flow. Approximately $425.6 million of the under recovered regulatory clause revenues for the Company is included in deferred charges and other assets at December 31, 2008. See Note 1 to the financial statements under “Revenues” and Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Fuel Cost Recovery” for additional information.
Income Tax Matters
Legislation
On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). Major tax incentives in the ARRA include an extension of bonus depreciation and multiple renewable energy incentives. These incentives, which could have a significant impact on the Company’s future cash flow and net income. Additionally,income of the Company. The Company estimates the cash flow reduction to 2009 tax payments as a result of the bonus depreciation provisions of the ARRA includes programsto be $112 million. On December 8, 2009, President Obama announced proposals to accelerate job growth that include an extension of the bonus depreciation provision for renewable energy,the ARRA for 2010, which could have a significant impact on the future cash flow and net income of the Company.
On October 27, 2009, Southern Company and its subsidiaries received notice that an award of $165 million had been granted, of which $51 million is available to the Company, under the ARRA grant application for transmission and smart grid enhancement, fossil energydistribution automation and research,modernization projects pending final negotiations. The Company continues to assess the other financial implications of the ARRA.
The U.S. House of Representatives and energy efficiency and conservation. the U.S. Senate have passed separate bills related to healthcare reform. Both bills include a provision that would make Medicare Part D subsidy reimbursements taxable. If enacted into law, this provision could have a significant negative impact on the Company’s net income. See Note 2 to the financial statements under “Other Postretirement Benefits” for additional information.
The ultimate impact of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Income Tax Matters
Georgia State Income Tax Credits
The Company’s 2005 through 2008 income tax filings for the State of Georgia include state income tax credits for increased activity through Georgia ports. The Company has also filed similar claims for the years 2002 through 2004. The Georgia Department of

II-185


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Revenue (DOR) has not responded to these claims. In July 2007, the Company filed a complaint in the Superior Court of Fulton County to recover the credits claimed for the years 2002 through 2004. An unrecognized tax benefit has been recorded related to these credits. See Note 5 to the financial statements under “Unrecognized Tax Benefits” for additional information. If the Company prevails, these claims could have a significant, and possibly material, positive effect on the Company’s net income. If the Company is not successful, payment of the related state tax could have a significant, and possibly material, negative effect on the Company’s cash flow. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined. See Note 3 under “Income Tax Matters” and Note 5 under “Unrecognized Tax Benefits” for additional information.

II-188


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Internal Revenue Code Section 199 Domestic Production Deduction
The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 created a tax deduction for a portion of income attributable to U.S. production activities as defined in Section 199 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Internal Revenue Code), Section 199 (production activities deduction).amended. The deduction is equal to a stated percentage of qualified production activities net income. The percentage is phased in over the years 2005 through 2010 with a 3% rate applicable to the years 2005 and 2006, a 6% rate applicable for the years 2007 through 2009, and a 9% rate thereafter. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has not clearly defined a methodology for calculating this deduction. However, Southern Company has agreed with the IRS on a calculation methodology and signed a closing agreement on December 11, 2008. Therefore, the Company reversed the unrecognized tax benefit and adjusted the deduction to conform to the agreement. The net impact of the reversal of the unrecognized tax benefits combined with the application of the new methodology had no material effect on the Company’s financial statements. See Note 5 to the financial statements under “Effective Tax Rate” for additional information.
NuclearConstruction
ConstructionNuclear
InOn August 2006,26, 2009, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued an Early Site Permit and Limited Work Authorization to Southern Nuclear, on behalf of the Company, Oglethorpe Power Corporation, the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, and the City of Dalton, Georgia, an incorporated municipality in the State of Georgia acting by and through its Board of Water, Light, and Sinking Fund Commissioners (collectively, Owners), filed an application with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for an early site permit relatingrelated to two additional nuclear units on the site of Plant Vogtle.Vogtle (Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4). See Note 4 to the financial statements for additional information on these co-owners. OnIn March 31, 2008, Southern Nuclear filed an application with the NRC for a combined construction and operating license (COL) for the new units. If licensed by the NRC, Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 are scheduled to be placed in service in 2016 and 2017, respectively.
OnIn April 8, 2008, the Company, acting for itself and as agent for the Owners, and a consortium consisting of Westinghouse Electric Company LLC (Westinghouse) and Stone & Webster, Inc. (collectively, Consortium) entered into an engineering, procurement, and construction agreement to design, engineer, procure, construct, and test two AP1000 nuclear units with electric generating capacity of approximately 1,100 megawatts each and related facilities, structures, and improvements at Plant Vogtle (Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement).
The Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement is an arrangement whereby the Consortium supplies and constructs the entire facility with the exception of certain items provided by the Owners. Under the terms of the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement, the Owners willagreed to pay a purchase price that will be subject to certain price escalationescalations and adjustments, including certain index-based adjustments, as well as adjustments for change orders, and performance bonuses.bonuses for early completion and unit performance. Each Owner is severally (and not jointly) liable for its proportionate share, based on its ownership interest, of all amounts owed to the Consortium under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement. The Company’s proportionate share based on its current ownership interest, is 45.7%. Under
On February 23, 2010, the terms of a separate joint development agreement,Company, acting for itself and as agent for the Owners, finalized their ownership percentages on July 2, 2008, except for allowed changes, under certain limited circumstances, duringand the Georgia PSC certification process.
On August 1, 2008, the Company submittedConsortium entered into an application for the Georgia PSCamendment to certify the project. Hearings began November 3, 2008 and a final certification decision is expected in March 2009.
If certified by the Georgia PSC and licensed by the NRC, Vogtle Units 3 and 4 are scheduled to be placed in service in 2016 and 2017, respectively. The total plant value to be placed in service will also include financing costs for each of the Owners, the impacts of inflation on costs, and transmission and other costs that are the responsibility of the Owners. The Company’s proportionate share of the estimated in-service costs, based on its current ownership interest, is approximately $6.4 billion, subject to adjustments and performance bonuses under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement. The amendment, which is subject to the approval of the Georgia PSC, replaces certain of the index-based adjustments to the purchase price with fixed escalation amounts.
The Owners and the Consortium have agreed to certain liquidated damages upon the Consortium’s failure to comply with the schedule and performance guarantees. The Owners and the Consortium also have agreed to certain bonuses payable to the Consortium for early completion and unit performance. The Consortium’s liability to the Owners for schedule and performance liquidated damages and warranty claims is subject to a cap.
TheCertain payment obligations of Westinghouse Electric Company LLC and Stone & Webster, Inc. under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement are guaranteed by Toshiba Corporation and The Shaw Group, Inc., respectively. In the event of certain credit rating downgrades of any Owner, such Owner will be required to provide a letter of credit or other credit enhancement.

II-189


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement is subject to certification by the Georgia PSC. In addition, the Owners may terminate the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement at any time for their convenience, provided that the Owners will be required to pay certain termination costs and, at certain stages of the work, cancellation fees to the Consortium. The Consortium may terminate the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement under certain circumstances, including delays in receipt of the COL or delivery of full notice to proceed, certain Owner suspension or delays of work, action by a governmental authority to permanently stop work, certain breaches of the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement by the Owners, Owner insolvency, and certain other events.

II-186


In connection with the certification application, the
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company has requested2009 Annual Report
On March 17, 2009, the Georgia PSC approvalvoted to include thecertify construction work in progress accounts forof Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 at an in-service cost of $6.4 billion. In addition, the Georgia PSC voted to approve the inclusion of the related construction work in progress accounts in rate base and allow the Company to recover financing costs during the construction period.base.
On February 11,April 21, 2009 the Governor of the State of Georgia State Senate passed Senate Bill 31signed into law the Georgia Nuclear Energy Financing Act that wouldwill allow the Company to recover financing costs for nuclear construction projects by including the related construction work in progress accounts in rate base during the construction period. A similar bill is being considered in the Georgia State House of Representatives.
IfThe cost recovery provisions will become effective on January 1, 2011. With respect to Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4, this legislation allows the Company is not permitted to recover theseprojected financing costs of approximately $1.7 billion during the construction period beginning in 2011, which reduces the projected in-service cost to approximately $4.4 billion.
On June 15, 2009, an environmental group filed a petition in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia seeking review of the Georgia PSC’s certification order and challenging the constitutionality of the Georgia Nuclear Energy Financing Act. The Company believes there is no meritorious basis for this petition and intends to vigorously defend against the requested actions.
On August 27, 2009, the NRC issued letters to Westinghouse revising the review schedules needed to certify the AP1000 standard design for new reactors and expressing concerns related to the availability of adequate information and the shield building design. The shield building protects the containment and provides structural support to the containment cooling water supply. The Company is continuing to work with Westinghouse and the NRC to resolve these concerns. Any possible delays in the AP1000 design certification schedule, including those addressed by the NRC in their letters, are not currently expected to affect the projected commercial operation dates for Plant Vogtle Units 3
and 4.
There are pending technical and procedural challenges to the construction and licensing of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4. Similar additional challenges at the state and federal level are expected as construction proceeds.
On August 31, 2009, the Company filed with the Georgia PSC its first semi-annual construction monitoring report for Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 for the period ended June 30, 2009 which did not include any proposed change to the estimated capitalconstruction cost as certified by the Georgia PSC in March 2009. On February 25, 2010, the Georgia PSC approved the expenditures would increasemade by approximately $144 million in 2011. See FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY — “Capital Requirements and Contractual Obligations” herein and Note 7the Company pursuant to the financial statements under “Construction Program” for these forecasted capital expenditures.certification through June 30, 2009. The Georgia PSC also ordered that in its future semi-annual construction monitoring reports, the Company will report against a total certified cost of approximately $6.1 billion, which is the effective certified amount after giving effect to the Georgia Nuclear Energy Financing Act as described above. The Company will continue to file construction monitoring reports by February 28 and August 31 of each year during the construction period.
The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot now be determined.determined at this time.
RelicensingOther Construction
The NRC operating licenses for Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2 currently expire in January 2027 and February 2029, respectively. In June 2007,On August 10, 2009, the Company filed an application with the NRC to extend the licensesits quarterly construction monitoring report for Plant VogtleMcDonough Units 14, 5, and 26 for the quarter ended June 30, 2009. On September 30, 2009, the Company amended the report. As amended, the report includes a request for an additional 20 years.increase in the certified costs to construct Plant McDonough. The Company anticipates the NRC may makeGeorgia PSC held a hearing in December 2009 and is scheduled to render its decision regarding the license extension for Plant Vogtle in 2009.on March 16, 2010. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Other Matters
The Company has initiated a voluntary attrition plan under which participating employees may elect to resign from their positions as of March 31, 2009. Approximately 700 employees who have indicated an interest in participating in the plan have been selected by the Company and are permitted to resign and receive severance. Each participating employee who resigns under the plan will be entitled to receive a severance payment equal to his or her annual base salary, accrued vacation, and pro-rated bonus as of March 31, 2009. The Company will record a charge during the first quarter of 2009 in connection with the plan. The ultimate amount of the charge will be dependent on the total number of employees who elect to resign under the plan. Such charge could have a material impact on the Company’s statements of income for the quarter ending March 31, 2009 and statements of cash flows for the six months ending June 30, 2009. The first quarter 2009 charge will generally be offset with lower salary costs for the remainder of the year and is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2009.
The Company is involved in various other matters being litigated, regulatory matters, and certain tax-related issues that could affect future earnings. In addition, the Company is subject to certain claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company’s business activities are subject to extensive governmental regulation related to public health and the environment.environment, such as regulation of air emissions and water discharges. Litigation over environmental issues and claims of various types, including property damage, personal injury, common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of environmental requirements such as opacity and air and water quality standards, has increased generally throughout the United States. In particular, personal injury and other claims for damages caused by alleged exposure to hazardous materials, and common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas and other emissions, have become more frequent. The ultimate outcome of such pending or potential litigation against the Company cannot be predicted at this time; however, for current proceedings not specifically reported herein, management does not anticipate that the liabilities, if any, arising from such current proceedings would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial statements. See Note 3 to the financial statements for information regarding material issues.

II-190II-187


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The Company prepares its financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Significant accounting policies are described in Note 1 to the financial statements. In the application of these policies, certain estimates are made that may have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations and related disclosures. Different assumptions and measurements could produce estimates that are significantly different from those recorded in the financial statements. Senior management has reviewed and discussed the following critical accounting policies and estimates with the Audit Committee of Southern Company’s Board of Directors.
Electric Utility Regulation
The Company is subject to retail regulation by the Georgia PSC and wholesale regulation by the FERC. These regulatory agencies set the rates the Company is permitted to charge customers based on allowable costs. As a result, the Company applies Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Statement No. 71, “Accounting for the Effects of Certain Types of Regulation” (SFAS No. 71),accounting standards which requiresrequire the financial statements to reflect the effects of rate regulation. Through the ratemaking process, the regulators may require the inclusion of costs or revenues in periods different than when they would be recognized by a non-regulated company. This treatment may result in the deferral of expenses and the recording of related regulatory assets based on anticipated future recovery through rates or the deferral of gains or creation of liabilities and the recording of related regulatory liabilities. The application of SFAS No. 71the accounting standards has a further effect on the Company’s financial statements as a result of the estimates of allowable costs used in the ratemaking process. These estimates may differ from those actually incurred by the Company; therefore, the accounting estimates inherent in specific costs such as depreciation, nuclear decommissioning, and pension and postretirement benefits have less of a direct impact on the Company’s results of operations than they would on a non-regulated company.
As reflected in Note 1 to the financial statements, significant regulatory assets and liabilities have been recorded. Management reviews the ultimate recoverability of these regulatory assets and liabilities based on applicable regulatory guidelines and accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. However, adverse legislative, judicial, or regulatory actions could materially impact the amounts of such regulatory assets and liabilities and could adversely impact the Company’s financial statements.
Contingent Obligations
The Company is subject to a number of federal and state laws and regulations, as well as other factors and conditions that potentially subject it to environmental, litigation, income tax, and other risks. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL herein and Note 3 to the financial statements for more information regarding certain of these contingencies. The Company periodically evaluates its exposure to such risks and, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), records reserves for those matters where a non-tax-related loss is considered probable and reasonably estimable and records a tax asset or liability if it is more likely than not that a tax position will be sustained. The adequacy of reserves can be significantly affected by external events or conditions that can be unpredictable; thus, the ultimate outcome of such matters could materially affect the Company’s financial statements. These events or conditions include the following:
 Changes in existing state or federal regulation by governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, control of toxic substances, hazardous and solid wastes, coal combustion byproducts, including coal ash, and other environmental matters.
 
 Changes in existing income tax regulations or changes in IRS or Georgia DOR interpretations of existing regulations.
 
 Identification of additional sites that require environmental remediation or the filing of other complaints in which the Company may be asserted to be a potentially responsible party.
 
 Identification and evaluation of other potential lawsuits or complaints in which the Company may be named as a defendant.
 
 Resolution or progression of new or existing matters through the legislative process, the court systems, the IRS, the Georgia DOR, the FERC, or the EPA.

II-191II-188


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Unbilled Revenues
Revenues related to the retail sale of electricity are recorded when electricity is delivered to customers. However, the determination of KWH sales to individual customers is based on the reading of their meters, which is performed on a systematic basis throughout the month. At the end of each month, amounts of electricity delivered to customers, but not yet metered and billed, are estimated. Components of the unbilled revenue estimates include total KWH territorial supply, total KWH billed, estimated total electricity lost in delivery, and customer usage. These components can fluctuate as a result of a number of factors including weather, generation patterns, and power delivery volume and other operational constraints. These factors can be unpredictable and can vary from historical trends. As a result, the overall estimate of unbilled revenues could be significantly affected, which could have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations.
Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits
The Company’s calculation of pension and other postretirement benefits expense is dependent on a number of assumptions. These assumptions include discount rates, health care cost trend rates, expected long-term return on plan assets, mortality rates, expected salary and wage increases, and other factors. Components of pension and other postretirement benefits expense include interest and service cost on the pension and other postretirement benefit plans, expected return on plan assets and amortization of certain unrecognized costs and obligations. Actual results that differ from the assumptions utilized are accumulated and amortized over future periods and, therefore, generally affect recognized expense and the recorded obligation in future periods. While the Company believes that the assumptions used are appropriate, differences in actual experience or significant changes in assumptions would affect its pension and other postretirement benefits costs and obligations.
Key elements in determining the Company’s pension and other postretirement benefit expense in accordance with GAAP are the expected long-term return on plan assets and the discount rate used to measure the benefit plan obligations and the periodic benefit plan expense for future periods. The expected long-term return on postretirement benefit plan assets is based on the Company’s investment strategy, historical experience, and expectations for long-term rates of return that considers external actuarial advice. The Company determines the long-term return on plan assets by applying the long-term rate of expected returns on various asset classes to the Company’s target asset allocation. The Company discounts the future cash flows related to its postretirement benefit plans using a single-point discount rate developed from the weighted average of market-observed yields for high quality fixed income securities with maturities that correspond to expected benefit payments.
A 25 basis point change in any significant assumption would result in an $8 million or less change in total benefit expense and a $104 million or less change in projected obligations.
New Accounting Standards
Variable Interest Entities
In June 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued new guidance on the consolidation of variable interest entities, which replaces the quantitative-based risks and rewards calculation for determining whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary in a variable interest entity with an approach that is primarily qualitative, requires ongoing assessments of whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity, and requires additional disclosures about an enterprise’s involvement in variable interest entities. The Company adopted this new guidance effective January 1, 2010, with no material impact on its financial statements.
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY
Overview
The Company’s financial condition remained stable at December 31, 2008.2009. Throughout the recent turmoil in the financial markets, the Company has maintained adequate access to capital without drawing on any of its committed bank credit arrangements used to support its commercial paper programs and variable rate pollution control revenue bonds. The Company has continued to issue commercial paper at reasonable rates. The Company intends to continue to monitor its access to short-term and long-term capital markets as well as its bank credit arrangements to meet future capital and liquidity needs. No material changes in bank credit arrangements have occurred although marketMarket rates for committed credit have increased in 2009, and the Company may continue to be subject to higher costs as its existing facilities are replaced or renewed. The Company’s interest costTotal committed credit fees for short-term debt has decreased as market short-term interest rates have declined. The ultimate impact on future financing costs as a resultthe Company average less than 3/ 8 of the financial turmoil cannot be determined at this time. The Company experienced no material counterparty credit losses as a result of the turmoil in the financial markets.1% per year. See “Sources of Capital” and “Financing Activities” herein for additional information.

II-189


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The Company’s investments in pension and nuclear decommissioning trust funds declinedremained stable in value as of December 31, 2008.2009. The Company expects that the earliest that cash may have to be contributed to the pension trust fund is 20112012 and such contribution could be significant; however, projections of the amount vary significantly depending on interpretations of and decisions related to federal legislation passed during 2008 as well as other key variables including future fund performance and cannot be determined at this time. The Company does not expect anyAny changes to funding obligations to the nuclear decommissioning trusts at this time.will be determined in connection with the Company’s 2010 retail rate case and are not currently expected to be material.
Cash flow from operations totaled $1.4 billion in 2009, a decrease of $310 million from 2008, primarily due to an $89 million decrease in net income, a reduction in deferred revenues of approximately $172 million, a reduction in accrued compensation of approximately $122 million, and an increase in fuel inventory additions of approximately $150 million, partially offset by a reduction in accounts receivable of approximately $210 million. Cash flow from operations totaled $1.7 billion in 2008, an increase of $279.2$279 million from 2007, primarily due to higher retail operating revenues partially offset by higher inventory additions. Cash flow from operations in 2007 totaled $1.4 billion, an increase of $248.5$249 million from 2006, primarily due to higher retail revenues primarily related to higher fuel cost recovery revenues and less cash used for working capital primarily from lower inventory additions and increases in other current liabilities. Cash flow from operations increased $117.4 million in 2006, primarily from increased retail operating revenues partially offset by higher fuel inventories and an increase in under recovered deferred fuel costs.
Net cash used for investing activities totaled $1.9$2.4 billion, $1.9 billion, and $1.2$1.9 billion in 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006,2007, respectively, due to gross property additions primarily related to installation of equipment to comply with environmental standards,standards; construction of generation, transmission, and distribution facilities,facilities; and purchase of nuclear fuel. The majority of funds needed for gross property additions for the last several years have been provided from operating activities, capital contributions from Southern Company, and the issuance of long and short-term debt and preference stock.
Cash provided from financing activities totaled $309.8$881 million, $429.7$310 million, and $46.4$430 million for 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006,2007, respectively. These totals are primarily related to additional issuances of senior notes in 2008 and 2007, and the issuance of short-term debt in 2006.all years. The statements of cash flows provide additional details. See “Financing Activities” herein.
Significant balance sheet changes in 2009 include the $1.9 billion increase in total property, plant, and equipment discussed above. Other significant balance sheet changes in 2009 include a $776 million increase in long-term debt to provide funds for the Company’s continuous construction program. Significant balance sheet changes in 2008 include a $1.1 billion increase in long-term debt primarily to replace short-term debt and provide funds for the Company’s continuous construction program and an increase in total property, plant, and equipment of $1.3 billion. Other significant balance sheet changes in 2008 include a decrease of $1.0 billion in prepaid pension costs, an increase of $908 million in other regulatory assets, and a decrease of $462 million in other regulatory liabilities primarily attributable to the decline in market value of the Company’s pension trust fund. Significant balance sheet changes in 2007 include a $726 million increase in long-term debt and a $221 million increase in preferred and preference stock primarily to replace short-term debt and provide funds for the

II-192


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Company’s continuous construction programs. Other balance sheet changes in 2007 include an increase in total property, plant and equipment of $1.3 billion and a $206 million decrease in the under recovered fuel balance.
The Company’s ratio of common equity to total capitalization, including short-term debt, was 47.8% in 2009, 46.5% in 2008, and 47.5% in 2007, and 48.6% in 2006.2007. The Company has received investment grade credit ratings from the major rating agencies with respect to debt, preferred securities, preferred stock, and preference stock. See “Credit Rating Risk” herein and SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA for additional information regarding the Company’s security ratings.
Sources of Capital
The Company plans to obtain the funds required for construction and other purposes from sources similar to those used in the past, which were primarily from operating cash flows, security issuances, term loans, short-term borrowings, and equity contributions from Southern Company. However, the type and timing of any future financings, if needed, will depend on market conditions, regulatory approvals, and other factors. In addition, on February 16, 2010, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) offered the Company a conditional commitment for federal loan guarantees that would apply to future Company borrowings related to Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4. Any borrowings guaranteed by the DOE would be full recourse to the Company and would be secured by a first priority lien on the Company’s ownership interest in Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4. Total guaranteed borrowings would not exceed 70% of eligible project costs, or approximately $3.4 billion, and are expected to be funded by the Federal Financing Bank. The Company has 90 days to accept the conditional commitment, including obtaining any necessary regulatory approvals. The Company will work with the DOE to finalize the loan guarantees. Final approval and issuance of loan guarantees by the DOE are subject to receipt of the COL for Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 from the NRC, negotiation of definitive agreements, completion of due diligence by the DOE, receipt of any necessary regulatory approvals, and satisfaction of other conditions. There can be no assurance that the DOE will issue loan guarantees for the Company. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “Construction — Nuclear” herein and Note 3 to the financial statements under “Nuclear Construction” for more information on Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4.

II-190


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The issuance of long-term securities by the Company is subject to the approval of the Georgia PSC. In addition, the issuance of short-term debt securities by the Company is subject to regulatory approval by the FERC. Additionally, with respect to the public offering of securities, the Company files registration statements with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. The amounts of securities authorized by the Georgia PSC and the FERC are continuously monitored and appropriate filings are made to ensure flexibility in the capital markets.
The Company obtains financing separately without credit support from any affiliate. See Note 6 to the financial statements under “Bank Credit Arrangements” for additional information. The Southern Company system does not maintain a centralized cash or money pool. Therefore, funds of the Company are not commingled with funds of any other company.
The Company’s current liabilities frequently exceed current assets because of the continued use of short-term debt as a funding source for under recovered fuel costs and to meet cash needs which can fluctuate significantly due to the seasonality of the business.
To meet short-term cash needs and contingencies, at December 31, 20082009 the Company had credit arrangements with banks totaling $1.3$1.7 billion. See Note 6 to the financial statements under “Bank Credit Arrangements” for additional information. In addition, the Company has substantial cash flow from operating activities and access to capital markets, including a commercial paper program, to meet liquidity needs.
At December 31, 2008,2009, bank credit arrangements were as follows:
               
       Expires 
 Total Unused 2009 2012 
   (in millions)  
 $1,345 $1,333  $225  $1,120  
               
       Expires 
 Total Unused 2010 2012 
   (in millions)  
 $1,715 $1,703  $595  $1,120  
Of the credit arrangements that expire in 2009,2010, $40 million allow for the execution of term loans for an additional two-year period.
The Company may also meet short-term cash needs through a Southern Company subsidiary organized to issue and sell commercial paper at the request and for the benefit of the Company and the other traditional operating companies. Proceeds from such issuances for the benefit of the Company are loaned directly to the Company and are not commingled with proceeds from issuances for the benefit of any other operating company. The obligations of each company under these arrangements are several; there is no cross affiliate credit support. As of December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had $256.3$324 million of outstanding commercial paper and a $100 million short-term bank loan outstanding.paper.
Financing Activities
During 2008,In February 2009, the Company issued $1.0 billion$500 million aggregate principal amount of Series 2009A 5.95% Senior Notes due February 1, 2039. In December 2009, the Company issued $500 million aggregate principal amount of Series 2009B 4.25% Senior Notes due December 1, 2019. The net proceeds from the sale of these senior notes were used by the Company to repay at maturity $150 million aggregate principal amount of its Series U Floating Rate Senior Notes and $125 million aggregate principal amount of its Series V 4.10% Senior Notes, to redeem $55 million aggregate principal amount of its Series D 5.50% Senior Notes, to repay a portion of its outstanding short-term indebtedness, and for general corporate purposes, including the Company’s continuous construction program.
The Company also incurred $312$416.5 million of obligations related to the issuance of pollution control revenue bonds. The issuancesbonds, the proceeds of which were used to reduce the Company’s short-term indebtedness, fund senior note maturities totaling $198retire $327.3 million redeemof pollution control revenue bonds totaling $259 million, and fundto finance the Company’s ongoing construction program.of certain solid waste disposal facilities.
During 2008,2009, the Company settled interest rate hedges of $325$300 million related to the issuance of senior notes at a loss of $20$19 million. Additionally,The effective portion of these losses has been deferred in other comprehensive income and is being amortized to interest expense over the life of the original interest rate hedges of $100 million were settled early at a loss of $2 million related to counterparty credit issues.

II-193


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
In 2008, the Company converted its entire $819 million of obligations related to auction rate pollution control revenue bonds from auction rate modes to other interest rate modes. Initially, approximately $332 million of the auction rate pollution control revenue bonds were converted to fixed interest rate modes and approximately $487 million were converted to variable rate modes. The Company subsequently converted approximately $203 million of its variable rate pollution control revenue bonds to fixed interest rate modes. The Company also incurred obligations related to the issuance of $53 million of pollution control revenue bonds for the Company’s Plant Hammond project. At December 31, 2008 the trustee held $22.4 million of the proceeds, which will be transferred to the Company for reimbursement of project costs.
In September 2008, the Company was required to purchase a total of approximately $76.6 million of variable rate pollution control revenue bonds that were tendered by investors. The Company subsequently remarketed $74.5 million of the tendered bonds. The remaining $2.1 million were extinguished.hedge.
In addition to any financings that may be necessary to meet capital requirements and contractual obligations, the Company plans to continue, when economically feasible, a program to retire higher-cost securities and replace these obligations with lower-cost capital if market conditions permit.

II-191


Subsequent to December 31, 2008, the
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company issued $500 million of Series 2009A 5.95% Senior Notes due February 1, 2039. The proceeds were used by the Company to repay at maturity $150 million aggregate principal amount of the Company’s Series U Floating Rate Senior Notes due February 7, 2009 to repay a portion of short-term indebtedness, and for general corporate purposes. The Company settled $100 million of hedges related to the issuance at a loss of approximately $16 million.Annual Report
Credit Rating Risk
The Company does not have any credit arrangements that would require material changes in payment schedules or terminations as a result of a credit rating downgrade. There are certain contracts that could require collateral, but not accelerated payment, in the event of a credit rating change to BBB- and/or Baa3 or below. These contracts are for physical electricity purchases and sales, fuel purchases, fuel transportation and storage, emissions allowances, energy price risk management, and for construction of new generation.generation facilities. At December 31, 2008,2009, the maximum potential collateral requirements under these contracts at a BBB- and/or Baa3 rating were approximately $27$32 million. At December 31, 2008,2009, the maximum potential collateral requirements under these contracts at a rating below BBB- and/or Baa3 weretotaled approximately $961 million.$1.2 billion. Included in these amounts are certain agreements that could require collateral in the event that one or more Southern Company system power pool participants has a credit rating change to below investment grade. Generally, collateral may be provided by a Southern Company guaranty, letter of credit, or cash. Additionally, any credit rating downgrade could impact the Company’s ability to access capital markets, particularly the short-term debt market.
On September 2, 2009, Moody’s Investors Service (Moody’s) affirmed the credit ratings of the Company’s senior unsecured notes and commercial paper of A2/P-1, respectively, and revised the rating outlook to negative. On September 4, 2009, Fitch Ratings, Inc. affirmed the Company’s senior unsecured notes and commercial paper ratings of A+/F1, respectively, but revised the Company’s rating outlook to negative. On October 6, 2009, Standard and Poor’s Rating Services, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. (S&P) affirmed the credit ratings of the Company’s senior unsecured notes and its short-term credit rating of A/A-1, respectively, and maintained its stable rating outlook.
Market Price Risk
Due to cost-based rate regulation, the Company has limited exposure to market rate volatility in interest rates, commodity fuel prices, and prices of electricity. To manage the volatility attributable to these exposures where possible, the Company nets the exposures,where possible, to take advantage of natural offsets and enters into various derivative transactions for the remaining exposures pursuant to the Company’s policies in areas such as counterparty exposure and hedgingrisk management practices. The Company’s policy is that derivatives are to be used primarily for hedging purposes and mandates strict adherence to all applicable risk management policies. Derivative positions are monitored using techniques including, but not limited to, market valuation, value at risk, stress tests, and sensitivity analysis.
To mitigate future exposure to changes in interest rates, the Company enters into forward starting interest rate swaps and other derivatives that have been designated as hedges. These derivatives have a notional amount of $851$300 million and are related to anticipated debt issuances and certain variable rate debt over the next two years.year. The weighted average interest rate on $291 million$1.2 billion of outstanding variable rate long-term debt that has not been hedged at January 1, 20092010 was 2.24%0.23%. If the Company sustained a 100 basis point change in interest rates for all unhedged variable rate long-term debt, the change would affect annualized interest expense by approximately $3$12 million at January 1, 2009.2010. See Notes 1 and 611 to the financial statements under “Financial Instruments” and “Interest Rate Derivatives,” respectively, for additional information.
To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in electricity prices, the Company enters into fixed-price contracts for the purchase and sale of electricity through the wholesale electricity market and, to a lesser extent, into financial hedge contracts for gas purchases.

II-194


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The changes in fair value of energy-related derivative contracts were as follows at December 31:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 Changes Changes Changes Changes
 Fair Value Fair Value
 (in millions) (in millions)
Contracts outstanding at the beginning of the period, assets (liabilities), net $(0.4) $(38.0) $(113) $ 
Contracts realized or settled  (68.5) 41.6  150  (69)
Current period changes(a)  (44.3)  (4.0)
Current period changes(a)
  (112)  (44)
Contracts outstanding at the end of the period, assets (liabilities), net $(113.2) $(0.4) $(75) $(113)
(a) Current period changes also include the changes in fair value of new contracts entered into during the period, if anyany.

II-192


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The decreasechange in the fair value positions of the energy-related derivative contracts for the year endedyear-ended December 31, 20082009 was $112.8an increase of $38.2 million, substantially all of which is due to natural gas positions. ThisThe change is attributable to both the volume of million British thermal units (mmBtu) and pricesthe price of natural gas. At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had a net hedge volume of 70.7 million mmBtu with a weighted average contract cost approximately $1.08 per mmBtu above market prices, and 59.3 billion cubic feet (Bcf)million mmBtu at December 31, 2008 with a weighted average contract cost approximately $1.96 per million British thermal units (mmBtu) above market prices, compared to 44.1 Bcf at December 31, 2007 with a weighted average contract cost approximately $0.02 per mmBtu above market prices. TheseSubstantially all natural gas hedges gains and losses are designated as regulatory hedges.recovered through the Company’s fuel cost recovery mechanism.
Energy-relatedAt December 31, 2009 and 2008, all of the Company’s energy-related derivative contracts which arewere designated as regulatory hedges relaterelated to the Company’s fuel hedging program whereprogram. Therefore, gains and losses are initially recorded as regulatory liabilities and assets, respectively, and then are included in fuel expense as they are recovered through the fuel cost recovery mechanism.
Gains and losses on energy-related derivative contracts that are not designated or fail to qualify as hedges are recognized in the statements of income as incurred.
Unrealized pre-tax gains/(losses) recognized in income for energy-related derivative contracts that are not hedgesincurred and were not material for any year presented.
The maturities of the energy-related derivative contracts and the level of the fair value hierarchy in which they fall at December 31, 20082009 are as follows:
                                
 December 31, 2008 December 31, 2009
 Fair Value Measurements Fair Value Measurements
 Total Maturity Total Maturity
 Fair Value Year 1 Years 2 & 3 Years 4 & 5 Fair Value Year 1 Years 2 & 3 Years 4 & 5
 (in millions) (in millions) 
Level 1 $ $ $ $  $ $ $ $ 
Level 2  (113.2)  (80.7)  (32.4)  (0.1)  (75) (47)  (27)  (1)
Level 3          
Fair value of contracts outstanding at end of period $(113.2) $(80.7) $(32.4) $(0.1) $(75) $(47) $(27) $(1)
As part of the adoption of FASB Statement No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” to increase consistency and comparability in fair value measurements and related disclosures, the table above now uses the three-tier fair value hierarchy, as discussed in Note 10 to the financial statements, as opposed to the previously used descriptions “actively quoted,” “external sources,” and “models and other methods.” The three-tier fair value hierarchy focuses on the fair value of the contract itself, whereas the previous descriptions focused on the source of the inputs. Because the Company uses over-the-counter contracts that are not exchange traded but are fair valued using prices which are actively quoted, and thus fall into Level 2. See Note 10 to the valuations of those contracts now appear in Level 2; previously they were shown as “actively quoted.”financial statements for further discussion on fair value measurement.
The Company is exposed to market price risk in the event of nonperformance by counterparties to the energy-related and interest rate derivative contracts. The Company’s practice is to enterCompany only enters into agreements and material transactions with counterparties that have investment grade credit ratings by Moody’s and Standard & Poor’sS&P or with counterparties who have posted collateral to cover potential credit exposure.
Therefore, the Company does not anticipate market risk exposure from nonperformance by the counterparties. For additional information, see NotesNote 1 and 6 to the financial statements under “Financial Instruments.”

II-195


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Instruments” and Note 11 to the financial statements.
Capital Requirements and Contractual Obligations
The construction program of the Company is currently estimated to be $2.5 billion for 2010, $2.4 billion for 2011, and $2.8 billion for 2009, $2.6 billion for 2010, and $2.6 billion for 2011. This estimate assumes the Company’s current request to include construction work in progress for Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 in rates is granted by the Georgia PSC or the Georgia legislature, beginning in 2011. If not, the estimate will increase by approximately $144 million in 2011.2012. Environmental expenditures included in these estimated amounts are $472$259 million, $334$350 million, and $399$600 million for 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2011,2012, respectively. The construction programs are subject to periodic review and revision, and actual construction costs may vary from these estimates because of numerous factors. These factors include: changes in business conditions; revised load growth estimates; changes in environmental statutes and regulations; changes in nuclear plants to meet new regulatory requirements; changes in FERC rules and regulations; Georgia PSC approvals; changes in legislation; the cost and efficiency of construction labor, equipment, and materials; project scope and design changes; and the cost of capital. In addition, there can be no assurance that costs related to capital expenditures will be fully recovered. See Note 3 and Note 7 to the financial statements under “Construction – Nuclear” and “Construction Program,” respectively, for additional information.
As a result of requirements by the NRC, the Company has established external trust funds for nuclear decommissioning costs. For additional information, see Note 1 to the financial statements under “Nuclear Decommissioning.”
In addition, as discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements, the Company provides postretirement benefits to substantially all employees and funds trusts to the extent required by the Georgia PSC and the FERC.
Other funding requirements related to obligations associated with scheduled maturities of long-term debt and preferred securities and the related interest, preferred and preference stock dividends, leases, derivative obligations, and other purchase commitments are as follows. See Notes 1, 6, 7, and 711 to the financial statements for additional information.

II-196II-193


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Contractual Obligations
                                                
 2010- 2012- After Uncertain   2011- 2013- After Uncertain  
 2009 2011 2013 2013 Timing(d) Total 2010 2012 2014 2014 Timing(d) Total
 (in millions) (in millions)
Long-term debt(a)
  
Principal $280 $667 $734 $5,612 $ $7,293  $250 $611 $525 $6,597 $ $7,983 
Interest 354 677 636 5,711  7,378  378 736 670 6,067  7,851 
Preferred and preference stock dividends(b)
 17 35 35   87  17 35 35   87 
Energy-related derivative obligations(c)
 85 33    118  47 27 1   75 
Interest derivatives 21     21 
Operating leases 43 65 32 28  168  37 54 28 17  136 
Capital leases 4 9 10 40  63 
Unrecognized tax benefits and interest(d)
 142    9 151  183    18 201 
Purchase commitments(e)
  
Capital(f)
 2,615 4,942    7,557  2,298 4,984    7,282 
Limestone(g)
 10 34 31 37  112  19 30 32 20  101 
Coal 2,497 3,713 1,406 1,999  9,615  2,239 2,609 959 1,533  7,340 
Nuclear fuel 139 219 199 33  590  198 224 171 207  800 
Natural gas(h)
 657 631 744 2,917  4,949  473 1,028 772 3,414  5,687 
Purchased power 370 656 506 2,186  3,718  343 583 472 1,939  3,337 
Long-term service agreements(i)
 14 32 103 581  730  14 61 91 550  716 
Trusts —  
Nuclear decommissioning(j)
 3 7 7 53  70  3 7 7 53  70 
Postretirement benefits(k)
 39 81    120  31 53    84 
Total $7,286 $11,792 $4,433 $19,157 $9 $42,677  $6,534 $11,051 $3,773 $20,437 $18 $41,813 
(a) All amounts are reflected based on final maturity dates. The Company plans to continue to retire higher-cost securities and replace these obligations with lower-cost capital if market conditions permit. Variable rate interest obligations are estimated based on rates as of January 1, 2009,2010, as reflected in the statements of capitalization. Fixed rates include, where applicable, the effects of interest rate derivatives employed to manage interest rate risk. Excludes capital lease amounts (shown separately).
 
(b) Preferred and preference stock does not mature; therefore, amounts provided are for the next five years only.
 
(c) For additional information see Notes 1 and 611 to the financial statements.
 
(d) The timing related to the realization of $9$18 million in unrecognized tax benefits and corresponding interest payments cannot be reasonably and reliably estimated due to uncertainties in the timing of the effective settlement of tax positions. Of the total $151$201 million, $81$97 million is the estimated cash payment. See Note 3 under “Income Tax Matters” and Note 5 under “Unrecognized Tax Benefits” to the financial statements for additional information.
 
(e) The Company generally does not enter into non-cancelable commitments for other operations and maintenance expenditures. Total other operations and maintenance expenses for the last three years were $1.6$1.5 billion, $1.6 billion, and $1.6 billion, respectively.
 
(f) The Company forecasts capital expenditures over a three-year period. Amounts represent current estimates of total expenditures, excluding those amounts related to contractual purchase commitments for nuclear fuel. At December 31, 2008,2009, significant purchase commitments were outstanding in connection with the construction program.
 
(g) As part of the Company’s program to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions from its coal plants, the Company has begun construction of flue gas desulfurization projects and has entered into various long-term commitments for the procurement of limestone to be used in suchflue gas desulfurization equipment.
 
(h) Natural gas purchase commitments are based on various indices at the time of delivery. Amounts reflected have been estimated based on the New York Mercantile Exchange future prices at December 31, 2008.2009.
 
(i) Long-term service agreements include price escalation based on inflation indices.
 
(j) Projections of nuclear decommissioning trust contributions are based on the 2007 Retail Rate Plan.Plan and are subject to change in the 2010 retail rate case.
 
(k) The Company forecasts postretirement trust contributions over a three-year period. The Company expects that the earliest that cash may have to be contributed to the pension trust fund is 2011 and such contribution could be significant; however,2012. The projections of the amount vary significantly depending on interpretations of and decisions related to federal legislation passed during 2008 as well as other key variables including future trust fund performance and cannot be determined at this time. Therefore, no amounts related to the pension trust fund are included in the table. See Note 2 to the financial statements for additional information related to the pension and postretirement plans, including estimated benefit payments. Certain benefit payments will be made through the related trusts. Other benefit payments will be made from the Company’s corporate assets.

II-197II-194


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
The Company’s 20082009 Annual Report contains forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements concerning retail sales, growth, retail rates, fuel cost recovery and other rate actions, environmental regulations and expenditures, the Company’s projections for postretirement benefit and nuclear decommissioning trust contributions, financing activities, access to sources of capital, the impacts of the adoption of new accounting rules, impacts of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, impact of healthcare legislation, if any, estimated sales and purchases under new power sale and purchase agreements, start and completion of construction projects, and estimated construction and other expenditures. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “could,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “projects,” “predicts,” “potential,” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other similar terminology. There are various factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those suggested by the forward-looking statements; accordingly, there can be no assurance that such indicated results will be realized. These factors include:
  the impact of recent and future federal and state regulatory change, including legislative and regulatory initiatives regarding deregulation and restructuring of the electric utility industry, implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, environmental laws including regulation of water quality and emissions of sulfur, nitrogen, mercury, carbon, soot, or particulate matter, or coal combustion byproducts and other substances, and also changes in tax and other laws and regulations to which the Company is subject, as well as changes in application of existing laws and regulations;
 
  current and future litigation, regulatory investigations, proceedings, or inquiries, including FERC matters and the pending EPA civil action against the Company;
 
  the effects, extent, and timing of the entry of additional competition in the markets in which the Company operates;
 
  variations in demand for electricity, including those relating to weather, the general economy and recovery from the recent recession, population, business growth (and declines), and the effects of energy conservation measures;
 
  available sources and costs of fuels;
 
  effects of inflation;
 
  ability to control costs;costs and avoid cost overruns during the development and construction of facilities;
 
  investment performance of the Company’s employee benefit plans;plans and nuclear decommissioning trusts;
 
  advances in technology;
 
  state and federal rate regulations and the impact of pending and future rate cases and negotiations, including rate cases related to fuel and other cost recovery;recovery mechanisms;
 
  regulatory approvals and actions related to the potential Plant Vogtle expansion, including Georgia PSC and NRC approvals;approvals and potential DOE loan guarantees;
 
  internal restructuring or other restructuring options that may be pursued;
 
  potential business strategies, including acquisitions or dispositions of assets or businesses, which cannot be assured to be completed or beneficial to the Company;
 
  the ability of counterparties of the Company to make payments as and when due and to perform as required;
 
  the ability to obtain new short- and long-term contracts with neighboring utilities;wholesale customers;
 
  the direct or indirect effect on the Company’s business resulting from terrorist incidents and the threat of terrorist incidents;
 
  interest rate fluctuations and financial market conditions and the results of financing efforts, including the Company’s credit ratings;
 
  the ability of the Company to obtain additional generating capacity at competitive prices;
 
  catastrophic events such as fires, earthquakes, explosions, floods, hurricanes, droughts, pandemic health events such as an avian influenza,influenzas, or other similar occurrences;
 
  the direct or indirect effects on the Company’s business resulting from incidents similar toaffecting the August 2003 power outage in the Northeast;U.S. electric grid or operation of generating resources;
 
  the effect of accounting pronouncements issued periodically by standard-settingstandard setting bodies; and
 
  other factors discussed elsewhere herein and in other reports (including the Form 10-K) filed by the Company from time to time with the SEC.
The Company expressly disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

II-198II-195


STATEMENTS OF INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006
2007
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
 (in thousands)  (in thousands) 
Operating Revenues:
  
Retail revenues $7,286,345 $6,498,003 $6,205,620  $6,912,403 $7,286,345 $6,498,003 
Wholesale revenues — 
Non-affiliates 568,797 537,913 551,731 
Affiliates 286,219 277,832 252,556 
Wholesale revenues, non-affiliates 394,538 568,797 537,913 
Wholesale revenues, affiliates 111,964 286,219 277,832 
Other revenues 270,191 257,904 235,737  272,835 270,191 257,904 
Total operating revenues 8,411,552 7,571,652 7,245,644  7,691,740 8,411,552 7,571,652 
Operating Expenses:
  
Fuel 2,812,417 2,640,526 2,233,029  2,716,928 2,812,417 2,640,526 
Purchased power — 
Non-affiliates 442,951 332,064 332,606 
Affiliates 962,100 718,327 812,433 
Purchased power, non-affiliates 269,136 442,951 332,064 
Purchased power, affiliates 709,730 962,100 718,327 
Other operations and maintenance 1,580,922 1,561,736 1,560,469  1,494,192 1,580,922 1,561,736 
Depreciation and amortization 636,970 511,180 498,754  655,150 636,970 511,180 
Taxes other than income taxes 316,219 291,136 298,824  316,532 316,219 291,136 
Total operating expenses 6,751,579 6,054,969 5,736,115  6,161,668 6,751,579 6,054,969 
Operating Income
 1,659,973 1,516,683 1,509,529  1,530,072 1,659,973 1,516,683 
Other Income and (Expense):
  
Allowance for equity funds used during construction 95,294 68,177 31,524  96,788 95,294 68,177 
Interest income 7,219 3,560 2,459  2,242 7,219 3,560 
Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized  (345,416)  (343,462)  (317,947)  (385,889)  (345,415)  (343,461)
Other income (expense), net  (9,258) 14,705 8,833   (1,774)  (9,259) 14,705 
Total other income and (expense)  (252,161)  (257,020)  (275,131)  (288,633)  (252,161)  (257,019)
Earnings Before Income Taxes
 1,407,812 1,259,663 1,234,398  1,241,439 1,407,812 1,259,664 
Income taxes 487,504 417,521 442,334  410,013 487,504 417,521 
Net Income
 920,308 842,142 792,064  831,426 920,308 842,143 
Dividends on Preferred and Preference Stock
 17,381 6,006 4,839  17,381 17,381 6,007 
Net Income After Dividends on Preferred and Preference Stock
 $902,927 $836,136 $787,225  $814,045 $902,927 $836,136 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-196


STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
             
  2009  2008  2007 
      (in thousands)     
Operating Activities:
            
Net income $831,426  $920,308  $842,143 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided from operating activities —            
Depreciation and amortization, total  790,581   758,284   616,796 
Deferred income taxes  191,382   170,958   (78,010)
Deferred revenues  (48,962)  122,965   4,871 
Deferred expenses  (4,281)  1,605   2,950 
Allowance for equity funds used during construction  (96,788)  (95,294)  (68,177)
Pension, postretirement, and other employee benefits  (20,032)  (3,243)  8,836 
Stock based compensation expense  4,592   4,200   5,977 
Hedge settlements  (19,016)  (22,949)  12,121 
Insurance cash surrender value  19,742       
Other, net  20,212   (696)  15,600 
Changes in certain current assets and liabilities —            
-Receivables  126,758   (82,996)  134,276 
-Fossil fuel stock  (241,509)  (91,536)  (1,211)
-Materials and supplies  (6,139)  (20,021)  (32,998)
-Prepaid income taxes  21,067   (14,885)  10,002 
-Other current assets  (1,217)  (18,460)  (4,359)
-Accounts payable  (54,328)  (56,126)  22,626 
-Accrued taxes  (19,445)  117,524   (33,320)
-Accrued compensation  (100,547)  21,525   (30,039)
-Other current liabilities  24,678   16,788   20,702 
 
Net cash provided from operating activities  1,418,174   1,727,951   1,448,786 
 
Investing Activities:
            
Property additions  (2,514,972)  (1,847,953)  (1,765,345)
Investment in restricted cash from pollution control bonds        (59,525)
Distribution of restricted cash from pollution control revenue bonds  26,849   32,675    
Nuclear decommissioning trust fund purchases  (989,219)  (419,086)  (448,287)
Nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales  984,340   412,206   441,407 
Cost of removal, net of salvage  (56,494)  (62,722)  (47,565)
Change in construction payables, net of joint owner portion  106,008   2,639   24,893 
Other investing activities  25,479   (38,198)  (25,478)
 
Net cash used for investing activities  (2,418,009)  (1,920,439)  (1,879,900)
 
Financing Activities:
            
Decrease in notes payable, net  (33,137)  (358,497)  (17,690)
Proceeds —            
Capital contributions from parent company  931,382   272,894   322,448 
Preferred and preference stock        225,000 
Pollution control revenue bonds issuances  416,510   386,485   190,800 
Senior notes issuances  1,000,000   1,000,000   1,500,000 
Other long-term debt issuances  1,100   301,100    
Redemptions —            
Pollution control revenue bonds  (327,310)  (335,605)   
Capital leases  (1,693)  (1,125)  (2,185)
Senior notes  (333,000)  (198,097)  (300,000)
Other long-term debt        (762,887)
Payment of preferred and preference stock dividends  (17,568)  (17,016)  (3,143)
Payment of common stock dividends  (738,900)  (721,200)  (689,900)
Other financing activities  (15,979)  (19,104)  (32,787)
 
Net cash provided from financing activities  881,405   309,835   429,656 
 
Net Change in Cash and Cash Equivalents
  (118,430)  117,347   (1,458)
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Year
  132,739   15,392   16,850 
 
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Year
 $14,309  $132,739  $15,392 
 
Supplemental Cash Flow Information:
            
Cash paid during the period for —            
Interest (net of $39,849, $39,807 and $28,668 capitalized, respectively) $341,003  $309,264  $317,938 
Income taxes (net of refunds)  227,778   279,904   456,852 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-197


BALANCE SHEETS
At December 31, 2009 and 2008
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
         
Assets 2009  2008 
  (in thousands) 
Current Assets:
        
Cash and cash equivalents $14,309  $132,739 
Restricted cash and cash equivalents     22,381 
Receivables —        
Customer accounts receivable  486,885   554,219 
Unbilled revenues  172,035   147,978 
Under recovered regulatory clause revenues  291,837   338,780 
Joint owner accounts receivable  146,932   38,710 
Other accounts and notes receivable  62,758   59,189 
Affiliated companies  11,775   13,091 
Accumulated provision for uncollectible accounts  (9,856)  (10,732)
Fossil fuel stock, at average cost  726,266   484,757 
Materials and supplies, at average cost  362,803   356,537 
Vacation pay  74,566   71,217 
Prepaid income taxes  132,668   65,987 
Other regulatory assets, current  76,634   118,961 
Other current assets  62,651   63,464 
 
Total current assets  2,612,263   2,457,278 
 
Property, Plant, and Equipment:
        
In service  25,120,034   23,975,262 
Less accumulated provision for depreciation  9,493,068   9,101,474 
 
Plant in service, net of depreciation  15,626,966   14,873,788 
Nuclear fuel, at amortized cost  339,810   278,412 
Construction work in progress  2,521,091   1,434,989 
 
Total property, plant, and equipment  18,487,867   16,587,189 
 
Other Property and Investments:
        
Equity investments in unconsolidated subsidiaries  66,106   57,163 
Nuclear decommissioning trusts, at fair value  580,322   460,430 
Miscellaneous property and investments  38,516   40,945 
 
Total other property and investments  684,944   558,538 
 
Deferred Charges and Other Assets:
        
Deferred charges related to income taxes  608,851   572,528 
Deferred under recovered regulatory clause revenues  373,245   425,609 
Other regulatory assets, deferred  1,321,904   1,449,352 
Other deferred charges and assets  205,492   265,174 
 
Total deferred charges and other assets  2,509,492   2,712,663 
 
Total Assets
 $24,294,566  $22,315,668 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-198


BALANCE SHEETS
At December 31, 2009 and 2008
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
         
Liabilities and Stockholder’s Equity 2009  2008 
  (in thousands) 
Current Liabilities:
        
Securities due within one year $253,882  $280,443 
Notes payable  323,958   357,095 
Accounts payable —        
Affiliated  238,599   260,545 
Other  602,003   422,485 
Customer deposits  200,103   186,919 
Accrued taxes —        
Accrued income taxes  548   70,916 
Unrecognized tax benefits  164,863   128,712 
Other accrued taxes  290,174   278,172 
Accrued interest  89,228   79,432 
Accrued vacation pay  57,662   57,643 
Accrued compensation  42,756   135,191 
Liabilities from risk management activities  49,788   113,432 
Other cost of removal obligations, current  216,000    
Other regulatory liabilities, current  99,807   60,330 
Other current liabilities  84,319   75,846 
 
Total current liabilities  2,713,690   2,507,161 
 
Long-Term Debt(See accompanying statements)
  7,782,340   7,006,275 
 
Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities:
        
Accumulated deferred income taxes  3,389,907   3,064,580 
Deferred credits related to income taxes  133,683   140,933 
Accumulated deferred investment tax credits  242,496   256,218 
Employee benefit obligations  923,177   882,965 
Asset retirement obligations  676,705   688,019 
Other cost of removal obligations  124,662   396,947 
Other regulatory liabilities, deferred  1,234   115,865 
Other deferred credits and liabilities  137,790   111,505 
 
Total deferred credits and other liabilities  5,629,654   5,657,032 
 
Total Liabilities
  16,125,684   15,170,468 
 
Preferred Stock(See accompanying statements)
  44,991   44,991 
 
Preference Stock(See accompanying statements)
  220,966   220,966 
 
Common Stockholder’s Equity(See accompanying statements)
  7,902,925   6,879,243 
 
Total Liabilities and Stockholder’s Equity
 $24,294,566  $22,315,668 
 
Commitments and Contingent Matters(See notes)
        
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-199


STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWSCAPITALIZATION
For the Years EndedAt December 31, 2008, 2007,2009 and 2006
2008
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
             
  2008  2007  2006 
      (in thousands)     
Operating Activities:
            
Net income $920,308  $842,142  $792,064 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided from operating activities —            
Depreciation and amortization  758,283   616,796   588,428 
Deferred income taxes and investment tax credits, net  170,958   (78,010)  16,159 
Deferred revenues  122,964   4,871   (136)
Allowance for equity funds used during construction  (95,294)  (68,177)  (31,524)
Pension, postretirement, and other employee benefits  (3,243)  8,836   18,604 
Stock based compensation expense  4,200   5,977   5,805 
Hedge settlements  (22,949)  12,121    
Other, net  909   18,550   4,592 
Changes in certain current assets and liabilities —            
Receivables  (82,995)  134,276   1,193 
Fossil fuel stock  (91,536)  (1,211)  (194,256)
Materials and supplies  (20,021)  (32,998)  31,317 
Prepaid income taxes  (14,885)  10,002   1,060 
Other current assets  (18,460)  (4,359)  774 
Accounts payable  (56,126)  22,626   (85,189)
Accrued taxes  117,524   (33,320)  82,735 
Accrued compensation  21,525   (30,039)  (10,328)
Other current liabilities  16,789   20,703   (21,054)
 
Net cash provided from operating activities  1,727,951   1,448,786   1,200,244 
 
Investing Activities:
            
Property additions  (1,847,952)  (1,765,344)  (1,219,498)
Investment in restricted cash from pollution control bonds     (59,525)   
Distribution of restricted cash from pollution control bonds  32,675       
Nuclear decommissioning trust fund purchases  (419,086)  (448,287)  (464,274)
Nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales  412,206   441,407   457,394 
Cost of removal net of salvage  (62,722)  (47,565)  (33,620)
Change in construction payables, net of joint owner portion  2,639   24,893   35,075 
Other  (38,199)  (25,479)  (16,005)
 
Net cash used for investing activities  (1,920,439)  (1,879,900)  (1,240,928)
 
Financing Activities:
            
Increase (decrease) in notes payable, net  (358,497)  (17,690)  406,768 
Proceeds —            
Senior notes  1,000,000   1,500,000   150,000 
Preferred and preference stock     225,000    
Pollution control revenue bonds  386,485   190,800   153,910 
Capital contributions from parent company  272,894   322,448   312,544 
Other long-term debt  301,100       
Redemptions —            
Pollution control revenue bonds  (335,605)     (153,910)
Capital leases  (1,125)  (2,185)  (136)
Senior notes  (198,097)  (300,000)  (150,000)
First mortgage bonds        (20,000)
Preferred and preference stock        (14,569)
Other long-term debt     (762,887)   
Payment of preferred and preference stock dividends  (17,016)  (3,143)  (2,958)
Payment of common stock dividends  (721,200)  (689,900)  (630,000)
Other  (19,104)  (32,787)  (5,253)
 
Net cash provided from financing activities  309,835   429,656   46,396 
 
Net Change in Cash and Cash Equivalents
  117,347   (1,458)  5,712 
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Year
  15,392   16,850   11,138 
 
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Year
 $132,739  $15,392  $16,850 
 
Supplemental Cash Flow Information:
            
Cash paid during the period for —            
Interest (net of $39,807, $28,668, and $12,530 capitalized, respectively) $309,264  $317,938  $317,536 
Income taxes (net of refunds)  279,904   456,852   398,735 
 
                 
  2009  2008  2009  2008 
  (in thousands)  (percent of total) 
Long-Term Debt:
                
Long-term debt payable to affiliated trusts —                
5.88% due 2044 $206,186  $206,186         
 
Long-term notes payable —                
4.10% due 2009     125,300         
Variable rate (2.3288% at 1/1/09) due 2009     150,000         
Variable rate (0.80% at 1/1/10) due 2010  250,000   250,000         
Variable rate (2.95% at 1/1/10) due 2011  300,000   300,000         
4.00% to 5.57% due 2011  102,500   101,100         
5.125% due 2012  200,000   200,000         
4.90% to 6.00% due 2013  525,000   525,000         
4.25% to 8.20% due 2015-2048  4,363,903   3,421,903         
 
Total long-term notes payable  5,741,403   5,073,303         
 
Other long-term debt —                
Pollution control revenue bonds:                
1.95% to 5.75% due 2016-2048  1,134,080   1,309,190         
Variable rate (0.25% at 1/1/10) due 2011  8,330   8,330         
Variable rate (0.18% to 0.30% at 1/1/10) due 2016-2049  892,315   628,005         
 
Total other long-term debt  2,034,725   1,945,525         
 
Capitalized lease obligations  62,805   67,948         
 
Unamortized debt discount  (8,897)  (6,244)        
 
Total long-term debt (annual interest requirement — $377.6 million)  8,036,222   7,286,718         
Less amount due within one year  253,882   280,443         
 
Long-term debt excluding amount due within one year  7,782,340   7,006,275   48.8%  49.5%
 
Preferred and Preference Stock:
                
Non-cumulative preferred stock
                
$25 par value — 6.125%                
Authorized - 50,000,000 shares                
Outstanding - 1,800,000 shares  44,991   44,991         
Non-cumulative preference stock
                
$100 par value — 6.50%                
Authorized - 15,000,000 shares                
Outstanding - 2,250,000 shares  220,966   220,966         
 
Total preferred and preference stock
(annual dividend requirement — $17.4 million)
  265,957   265,957   1.7   1.9 
 
Common Stockholder’s Equity:
                
Common stock, without par value —                
Authorized: 20,000,000 shares                
Outstanding: 9,261,500 shares  398,473   398,473         
Paid-in capital  4,592,350   3,655,731         
Retained earnings  2,932,934   2,857,789         
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)  (20,832)  (32,750)        
 
Total common stockholder’s equity  7,902,925   6,879,243   49.5   48.6 
 
Total Capitalization
 $15,951,222  $14,151,475   100.0%  100.0%
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-200


BALANCE SHEETSSTATEMENTS OF COMMON STOCKHOLDER’S EQUITY
AtFor the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007

Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
         
Assets 2008  2007 
  (in thousands) 
Current Assets:
        
Cash and cash equivalents $132,739  $15,392 
Restricted cash  22,381   48,279 
Receivables —        
Customer accounts receivable  554,220   491,389 
Unbilled revenues  147,978   137,046 
Under recovered regulatory clause revenues  338,780   384,538 
Other accounts and notes receivable  97,898   147,498 
Affiliated companies  13,091   21,699 
Accumulated provision for uncollectible accounts  (10,732)  (7,636)
Fossil fuel stock, at average cost  484,757   393,222 
Materials and supplies, at average cost  356,537   337,652 
Vacation pay  71,217   69,394 
Prepaid income taxes  65,987   51,101 
Other  182,425   55,169 
 
Total current assets  2,457,278   2,144,743 
 
Property, Plant, and Equipment:
        
In service  23,975,262   22,011,215 
Less accumulated provision for depreciation  9,101,474   8,696,668 
 
   14,873,788   13,314,547 
Nuclear fuel, at amortized cost  278,412   198,983 
Construction work in progress  1,434,989   1,797,642 
 
Total property, plant, and equipment  16,587,189   15,311,172 
 
Other Property and Investments:
        
Equity investments in unconsolidated subsidiaries  57,163   53,813 
Nuclear decommissioning trusts, at fair value  460,430   588,952 
Other  40,945   47,914 
 
Total other property and investments  558,538   690,679 
 
Deferred Charges and Other Assets:
        
Deferred charges related to income taxes  572,528   532,539 
Prepaid pension costs     1,026,985 
Deferred under recovered regulatory clause revenues  425,609   307,294 
Other regulatory assets  1,449,352   541,014 
Other  265,174   268,335 
 
Total deferred charges and other assets  2,712,663   2,676,167 
 
Total Assets
 $22,315,668  $20,822,761 
 
                         
 
  Number of                
  Common             Accumulated  
  Shares Common Paid-In Retained Other Comprehensive  
  Issued Stock Capital Earnings Income (Loss) Total
          (in thousands)        
Balance at December 31, 2006
  9,262  $398,473  $3,039,845  $2,529,826  $(11,893) $5,956,251 
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock           836,136      836,136 
Capital contributions from parent company        334,931         334,931 
Other comprehensive loss              (2,000)  (2,000)
Cash dividends on common stock           (689,900)     (689,900)
Other        1   1      2 
 
Balance at December 31, 2007
  9,262   398,473   3,374,777   2,676,063   (13,893)  6,435,420 
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock           902,927      902,927 
Capital contributions from parent company        280,954         280,954 
Other comprehensive loss              (18,857)  (18,857)
Cash dividends on common stock           (721,200)     (721,200)
Other           (1)     (1)
 
Balance at December 31, 2008
  9,262   398,473   3,655,731   2,857,789   (32,750)  6,879,243 
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock           814,045      814,045 
Capital contributions from parent company        936,619         936,619 
Other comprehensive income              11,918   11,918 
Cash dividends on common stock           (738,900)     (738,900)
 
Balance at December 31, 2009
  9,262  $398,473  $4,592,350  $2,932,934  $(20,832) $7,902,925 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-201


BALANCE SHEETS
AtSTATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
         
Liabilities and Stockholder’s Equity 2008  2007 
  (in thousands)
Current Liabilities:
        
Securities due within one year $280,443  $198,576 
Notes payable  357,095   715,591 
Accounts payable —        
Affiliated  260,545   236,332 
Other  422,485   463,945 
Customer deposits  186,919   171,553 
Accrued taxes —        
Income taxes  70,916   68,782 
Unrecognized tax benefits  128,712    
Other  278,171   219,585 
Accrued interest  79,432   74,674 
Accrued vacation pay  57,643   56,303 
Accrued compensation  135,191   114,974 
Other  249,609   103,225 
 
Total current liabilities  2,507,161   2,423,540 
 
Long-term Debt(See accompanying statements)
  7,006,275   5,937,792 
 
Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities:
        
Accumulated deferred income taxes  3,064,580   2,850,655 
Deferred credits related to income taxes  140,933   146,886 
Accumulated deferred investment tax credits  256,218   269,125 
Employee benefit obligations  882,965   678,826 
Asset retirement obligations  688,019   663,503 
Other cost of removal obligations  396,947   414,745 
Other regulatory liabilities  115,865   577,642 
Other  111,505   158,670 
 
Total deferred credits and other liabilities  5,657,032   5,760,052 
 
Total Liabilities
  15,170,468   14,121,384 
 
Preferred and Preference Stock(See accompanying statements)
  265,957   265,957 
 
Common Stockholder’s Equity(See accompanying statements)
  6,879,243   6,435,420 
 
Total Liabilities and Stockholder’s Equity
 $22,315,668  $20,822,761 
 
Commitments and Contingent Matters(See notes)
        
 
             
  2009 2008 2007
      (in thousands)    
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock
 $814,045  $902,927  $836,136 
 
Other comprehensive income (loss):            
Qualifying hedges:            
Changes in fair value, net of tax of $(1,133), $(13,150), and $(1,831), respectively  (1,826)  (20,846)  (2,938)
Reclassification adjustment for amounts included in net income, net of tax of $8,651, $1,255, and $278, respectively  13,744   1,989   441 
Marketable securities:            
Change in fair value, net of tax of $-, $-, and $291, respectively        497 
 
Total other comprehensive income (loss)  11,918   (18,857)  (2,000)
 
Comprehensive Income
 $825,963  $884,070  $834,136 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-202


STATEMENTS OF CAPITALIZATION
At December 31, 2008 and 2007
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
                 
  2008  2007  2008  2007 
  (in thousands)  (percent of total) 
Long-Term Debt:
                
Long-term debt payable to affiliated trusts —                
5.88% due 2044 $206,186  $206,186         
 
Long-term notes payable —                
6.55% due May 15, 2008     45,000         
4.10% due 2009  125,300   125,000         
Variable rate (5.00% at 1/1/08) due 2008     150,000         
Variable rate (2.3288% at 1/1/09) due 2009  150,000   150,000         
Variable rate (2.42% at 1/1/09) due 2010  250,000            
Variable rate (2.35% at 1/1/09) due 2011  300,000            
4.00% to 5.57% due 2011  101,100   100,000         
5.125% due 2012  200,000   200,000         
4.90% to 6.00% due 2013  525,000   125,000         
5.25% to 8.20% due 2015-2048  3,421,903   3,075,000         
 
Total long-term notes payable  5,073,303   3,970,000         
 
Other long-term debt —                
Pollution control revenue bonds:                
1.95% to 5.75% due 2016-2048  1,309,190   774,370         
Variable rate (1.05% at 1/1/09) due 2011  8,330   10,450         
Variable rate (0.80% to 3.00% at 1/1/09) due 2016-2041  628,005   1,109,825         
 
Total other long-term debt  1,945,525   1,894,645         
 
Capitalized lease obligations  67,948   70,733         
 
Unamortized debt discount  (6,244)  (5,196)        
 
Total long-term debt (annual interest requirement — $354.0 million)  7,286,718   6,136,368         
Less amount due within one year  280,443   198,576         
 
Long-term debt excluding amount due within one year  7,006,275   5,937,792   49.5%  47.0%
 
Preferred and Preference Stock:
                
Non-cumulative preferred stock
                
$25 par value — 6.125%                
Authorized — 50,000,000 shares                
Outstanding — 1,800,000 shares  44,991   44,991         
Non-cumulative preference stock
                
$100 par value — 6.50%                
Authorized — 15,000,000 shares                
Outstanding — 2,250,000 shares  220,966   220,966         
 
Total preferred and preference stock
(annual dividend requirement — $17.4 million)
  265,957   265,957   1.9   2.1 
 
Common Stockholder’s Equity:
                
Common stock, without par value —                
Authorized: 20,000,000 shares                
Outstanding: 9,261,500 shares  398,473   398,473         
Paid-in capital  3,655,731   3,374,777         
Retained earnings  2,857,789   2,676,063         
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)  (32,750)  (13,893)        
 
Total common stockholder’s equity  6,879,243   6,435,420   48.6   50.9 
 
Total Capitalization
 $14,151,475  $12,639,169   100.0%  100.0%
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-203


STATEMENTS OF COMMON STOCKHOLDER’S EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2008, 2007, and 2006
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
                     
              Accumulated  
  Common Paid-In Retained Other Comprehensive  
  Stock Capital Earnings Income (Loss) Total
  (in thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2005
 $398,473  $2,717,539  $2,372,637  $(36,566) $5,452,083 
Net income after dividends on preferred stock        787,225      787,225 
Capital contributions from parent company     322,306         322,306 
Other comprehensive income           5,184   5,184 
Adjustment to initially apply
FASB Statement No. 158, net of tax
           19,489   19,489 
Cash dividends on common stock        (630,000)     (630,000)
Other        (36)     (36)
 
Balance at December 31, 2006
  398,473   3,039,845   2,529,826   (11,893)  5,956,251 
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock        836,136      836,136 
Capital contributions from parent company     334,931         334,931 
Other comprehensive loss           (2,000)  (2,000)
Cash dividends on common stock        (689,900)     (689,900)
Other     1   1      2 
 
Balance at December 31, 2007
  398,473   3,374,777   2,676,063   (13,893)  6,435,420 
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock        902,927      902,927 
Capital contributions from parent company     280,954         280,954 
Other comprehensive loss           (18,857)  (18,857)
Cash dividends on common stock        (721,200)     (721,200)
Other        (1)     (1)
 
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $398,473  $3,655,731  $2,857,789  $(32,750) $6,879,243 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2008, 2007, and 2006
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
             
  2008 2007  2006 
  (in thousands)
Net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock
 $902,927  $836,136  $787,225 
 
Other comprehensive income (loss):            
Qualifying hedges:            
Changes in fair value, net of tax of $(13,150), $(1,831), and $(935), respectively  (20,846)  (2,938)  (1,454)
Reclassification adjustment for amounts included in net income, net of tax of $1,255, $278, and $(441), respectively  1,989   441   (700)
Marketable securities:            
Changes in fair value, net of tax of $-, $291, and $(494), respectively     497   (817)
Pension and other postretirement benefit plans:            
Change in additional minimum pension liability, net of tax of $-, $-, and $5,143, respectively        8,155 
 
Total other comprehensive income (loss)  (18,857)  (2,000)  5,184 
 
Comprehensive Income
 $884,070  $834,136  $792,409 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-204


NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
General
Georgia Power Company (the Company) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Southern Company, which is the parent company of four traditional operating companies, Southern Power Company (Southern Power), Southern Company Services, Inc. (SCS), Southern Communications Services, Inc. (SouthernLINC Wireless), Southern Company Holdings, Inc. (Southern Holdings), Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (Southern Nuclear), and other direct and indirect subsidiaries. The traditional operating companies — Alabama Power Company (Alabama Power), the Company, Gulf Power Company (Gulf Power), and Mississippi Power Company (Mississippi Power) — provide electric service in four Southeastern states. The Company operates as a vertically integrated utility providing electricity to retail customers within its traditional service area located within the State of Georgia and to wholesale customers in the Southeast. Southern Power constructs, acquires, owns, and manages generation assets and sells electricity at market-based rates in the wholesale market. SCS, the system service company, provides at cost, specialized services to Southern Company and its subsidiary companies. SouthernLINC Wireless provides digital wireless communications for use by Southern Company and its subsidiary companies and also markets these services to the public, and provides fiber cable services within the Southeast. Southern Holdings is an intermediate holding company subsidiary for Southern Company’s investments in leveraged leases and various other energy-related businesses. Southern Nuclear operates and provides services to Southern Company’s nuclear power plants.plants, including the Company’s Plants Hatch and Vogtle.
The equity method is used for subsidiaries in which the Company has significant influence but does not control and for variable interest entities where the Company is not the primary beneficiary. Certain prior years’ data presented in the financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation.
The Company is subject to regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Georgia Public Service Commission (PSC). The Company follows accounting principles generally accepted in the United States and complies with the accounting policies and practices prescribed by its regulatory commissions. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires the use of estimates, and the actual results may differ from those estimates.
Reclassifications
Certain prior years’ data presented in the financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation. The statements of income have been modified within the operating expenses section to combine the line items “Other operations” and “Maintenance” into a single line item entitled “Other operations and maintenance.” Due to materiality in the current period, the statements of cash flows for the prior periods presented were modified within the operating activities section to separately report the amount of “Deferred revenues” and “Hedge settlements” previously included in “Other, net” while the line item “Tax benefit of stock options” was collapsed into “Other, net.” Within the financing activities section of the statements of cash flows in the prior periods, the amount of “Gross excess tax benefit of stock options” was combined into “Other.” These reclassifications had no effect on total assets, net income, or cash flows.
Affiliate Transactions
The Company has an agreement with SCS under which the following services are rendered to the Company at direct or allocated cost: general and design engineering, purchasing, accounting and statistical analysis, finance and treasury, tax, information resources, marketing, auditing, insurance and pension administration, human resources, systems and procedures, digital wireless communications, and other services with respect to business and operations and power pool operations. Costs for these services amounted to $506 million in 2009, $490 million in 2008, and $449 million in 2007, and $393 million in 2006.2007. Cost allocation methodologies used by SCS were approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission prior to the repeal of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, as amended, and management believes they are reasonable. The FERC permits services to be rendered at cost by system service companies.
The Company has an agreement with Southern Nuclear under which the following nuclear-related services are rendered to the Company at cost: general executive and advisory services, general operations, management and technical services, administrative services including procurement, accounting, employee relations, systems and procedures services, strategic planning and budgeting services, and other services with respect to business and operations. Costs for these services amounted to $398 million in 2009, $410 million in 2008, and $380 million in 2007, and $348 million in 2006.
2007.

II-205II-203


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
The Company had an agreement with Southern Power under which the Company operated and maintained Southern Power’s Plants Dahlberg, Franklin, and Wansley at cost. In August 2007, that agreement was terminated and replaced with a service agreement under which the Company provides to Southern Power specifically requested services. Billings under these agreements with Southern Power amounted to $0.5 million in 2009, $1.9 million in 2008, and $6.8 million in 2007, and $5.4 million in 2006.2007.
Southern Company’s 30% ownership interest in Alabama Fuel Products, LLC (AFP), which produced synthetic fuel, was terminated in July 2006. The Company had an agreement with an indirect subsidiary of Southern Company that provided services for AFP. Under this agreement, the Company provided certain accounting functions, including processing and paying fuel transportation invoices, and the Company was reimbursed for its expenses. Amounts billed under this agreement totaled approximately $85 million in 2007, and $76 million in 2006.2007. In addition, the Company purchased synthetic fuel from AFP for use at Plant Branch. Synthetic fuel purchases totaled $278 million in both 2007 and 2006.2007. The related party transactions and synthetic fuel purchases were terminated as of December 31, 2007.
The Company has entered into several power purchase agreements (PPAs)(PPA) with Southern Power for capacity and energy. Expenses associated with these PPAs were $411 million, $480 million, and $440 million in 2009, 2008, and $407 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Additionally, the Company had $25$24 million and $26$25 million of prepaid capacity expenses included in deferred charges and other assets in the balance sheets at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, respectively. See Note 7 under “Purchased Power Commitments” for additional information.
The Company has an agreement with Gulf Power under which Gulf Power jointly owns a portion of Plant Scherer. Under this agreement, the Company operates Plant Scherer and Gulf Power reimburses the Company for its proportionate share of the related non-fuel expenses, which were $3.9 million in 2009, $8.1 million in 2008, and $5.1 million in 2007, and $8.0 million in 2006.2007. See Note 4 for additional information.
In 2008, the Company purchased a compressor assembly from Southern Power for $3.9 million.
In 2007, the Company sold equipment at cost to Gulf Power for $4.0 million.
The Company provides incidental services to and receives such services from other Southern Company subsidiaries which are generally minor in duration and amount. The Company neither provided nonor received any significant storm assistanceservices to or from affiliates in 2009, 2008, 2007, or 2006.2007.
Also see Note 4 for information regarding the Company’s ownership in and a PPA with Southern Electric Generating Company (SEGCO) and Note 5 for information on certain deferred tax liabilities due to affiliates.
The traditional operating companies, including the Company, and Southern Power may jointly enter into various types of wholesale energy, natural gas, and certain other contracts, either directly or through SCS as agent. Each participating company may be jointly and severally liable for the obligations incurred under these agreements. See Note 7 under “Fuel Commitments” for additional information.
Regulatory Assets and Liabilities
The Company is subject to the provisions of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Statement No. 71, “Accountingin accounting for the Effectseffects of Certain Types of Regulation” (SFAS No. 71).governmental regulation. Regulatory assets represent probable future revenues associated with certain costs that are expected to be recovered from customers through the ratemaking process. Regulatory liabilities represent probable future reductions in revenues associated with amounts that are expected to be credited to customers through the ratemaking process.

II-206II-204


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Regulatory assets and (liabilities) reflected in the Company’s balance sheets at December 31 relate to the following:
                        
 2008 2007 Note 2009 2008 Note 
 (in millions)  (in millions) 
Deferred income tax charges $573 $533  (a) $609�� $573  (a)
Loss on reacquired debt 165 175  (b) 157 165  (b)
Vacation pay 71 69  (c) 75 71  (c, h)
Underfunded retiree benefit plans 903 235  (e) 952 921  (e, h)
Fuel-hedging (realized and unrealized) losses 130 14  (f) 82 130  (f)
Nuclear early site permit 49 28  (h)
Building leases 47 49  (i)
Generating plant outage costs 39 45  (j)
Other regulatory assets 160 133  (d) 49 98  (d)
Asset retirement obligations 209 41  (a) 116 209  (a, h)
Other cost of removal obligations  (397)  (415)  (a)  (341)  (397)  (a)
Deferred income tax credits  (141)  (147)  (a)  (134)  (141)  (a)
Overfunded retiree benefit plans   (540)  (e)
Environmental compliance cost recovery  (135)   (g)  (96)  (135)  (g)
Other regulatory liabilities  (14)  (21)  (d)  (1)  (15)  (b, d, f)
Total assets (liabilities), net $1,573 $105  $1,554 $1,573 
Note: The recovery and amortization periods for these regulatory assets and (liabilities) are as follows:
 
(a) Asset retirement and removal liabilities are recorded, deferred income tax assets are recovered, and deferred tax liabilities are amortized over the related property lives, which may range up to 60 years. Asset retirement and other cost of removal liabilities will be settled and trued up following completion of the related activities. Other cost of removal obligations include $216 million that may be amortized during 2010. See Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Rate Plans” for additional information.
 
(b) Recovered over either the remaining life of the original issue or, if refinanced, over the life of the new issue which may range up to 50 years.
 
(c) Recorded as earned by employees and recovered as paid, generally within one year.
 
(d) Recorded and recovered or amortized as approved by the Georgia PSC.PSC over periods not exceeding three years.
 
(e) Recovered and amortized over the average remaining service period which may range up to 1615 years. See Note 2 for additional information.
 
(f) Fuel-hedging assets and liabilities are recorded over the life of the underlying hedged purchase contracts, which generally do not exceed 42 months. Upon final settlement, costs are recovered through the Company’s fuel cost recovery clause.mechanism.
 
(g) This balance represents deferred revenue associated with the Environmental Compliance Cost Recoveryenvironmental compliance cost recovery (ECCR) tariff established in the 2007 Retail Rate Plan (as defined below). The recovery of the forecasted environmental compliance costs was levelized to collect equal annual amounts between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2010 under the tariff.
 
(h) This balance represents deferred costs incurredNot earning a return as offset in supportrate base by a corresponding asset or liability.
(i)See Note 6 under “Capital Leases.” Recovered over the remaining lives of preparationthe buildings through 2026.
(j)See “Property, Plant, and completion of an early site permit and combined construction andEquipment.” Recovered over the respective operating license (COL) for two additional nuclear generating units at Plant Vogtle (Units 3 and 4). The costs will be capitalizedcycles, which range from 18 months to construction work in progress upon certification by the Georgia PSC.10 years.
In the event that a portion of the Company’s operations is no longer subject to the provisions of SFAS No. 71,applicable accounting rules for rate regulation, the Company would be required to write off or reclassify to accumulated other comprehensive income related regulatory assets and liabilities that are not specifically recoverable through regulated rates. In addition, the Company would be required to determine if any impairment to other assets, including plant, exists and write down the assets, if impaired, to their fair value. All regulatory assets and liabilities are reflected in rates.

II-205


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Revenues
Energy and other revenues are recognized as services are provided. Unbilled revenues are accrued at the end of each fiscal period. Electric rates for the Company include provisions to adjust billings for fluctuations in fuel costs and the energy component of purchased power costs, and certain other costs. Revenues are adjusted for differences between the actual recoverable costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates.

II-207


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Retail fuel cost recovery rates require periodic filings with the Georgia PSC. In compliance with the order, the Company is required to file a new fuel cost recovery rate by March 1, 2009. On February 19, 2009, the Georgia PSC approved the Company’s request to delay the filing of that case until March 13, 2009. The new rates are expected to become effective on June 1, 2009. See Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Fuel Cost Recovery.” Recovery” for information on the Company’s current fuel case proceeding.
The Company has a diversified base of customers. No single customer or industry comprises 10% or more of revenues. For all periods presented, uncollectible accounts averaged less than 1% of revenues.
Fuel Costs
Fuel costs are expensed as the fuel is used. Fuel expense includes the cost of purchased emissionemissions allowances as they are used. Fuel expense also includes the amortization of the cost of nuclear fuel and a charge, based on nuclear generation, for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel. See Note 3 under “Nuclear Fuel Disposal Costs” for additional information.
Income and Other Taxes
The Company uses the liability method of accounting for deferred income taxes and provides deferred income taxes for all significant income tax temporary differences. Investment tax credits utilized are deferred and amortized to income over the average life of the related property. Taxes that are collected from customers on behalf of governmental agencies to be remitted to these agencies are presented net on the statements of income.
In accordance with FASB Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertaintyaccounting standards related to the uncertainty in Income Taxes,”income taxes, the Company recognizes tax positions that are “more likely than not” of being sustained upon examination by the appropriate taxing authorities. See Note 5 under “Unrecognized Tax Benefits” for additional information.
Property, Plant, and Equipment
Property, plant, and equipment is stated at original cost, less regulatory disallowances and impairments. Original cost includes: materials; labor; minor items of property; appropriate administrative and general costs; payroll-related costs such as taxes, pensions, and other benefits; and the interest capitalized and/or cost of funds used during construction.
The Company’s property, plant, and equipment consisted of the following at December 31:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008 
 (in millions) (in millions) 
Generation $11,478 $10,180  $12,185 $11,478 
Transmission 3,764 3,593  3,891 3,764 
Distribution 7,409 6,985  7,603 7,409 
General 1,296 1,225  1,413 1,296 
Plant acquisition adjustment 28 28  28 28 
Total plant in service $23,975 $22,011  $25,120 $23,975 
The cost of replacements of property, exclusive of minor items of property, is capitalized. The cost of maintenance, repairs, and replacement of minor items of property is charged to maintenance expense as incurred or performed with the exception of certain generating plant maintenance costs. As mandated by the Georgia PSC, the Company defers and amortizes nuclear refueling outage costs over the unit’s operating cycle before the next refueling.cycle. The refueling cycles are 18 and 24 months for Plants Vogtle and Hatch, respectively. Also, in accordance with the Georgia PSC, the Company defers the costs of certain significant inspection costs for the combustion turbines at Plant McIntosh and amortizes such costs over 10 years, which approximates the expected maintenance cycle.

II-206


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation of the original cost of utility plant in service is provided primarily by using composite straight-line rates, which approximated 3.0% in 2009, 2.9% in 2008, and 2.6% in 2007 and 2006.2007. Depreciation studies are conducted periodically to update the composite rates that are approved by the Georgia PSC. Effective January 1, 2008, the Company’s depreciation rates were revised by the Georgia PSC.

II-208


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
When property subject to depreciation is retired or otherwise disposed of in the normal course of business, its original cost, together with the cost of removal, less salvage, is charged to accumulated depreciation. For other property dispositions, the applicable cost and accumulated depreciation is removed from the balance sheet accounts and a gain or loss is recognized. Minor items of property included in the original cost of the plant are retired when the related property unit is retired.
Under the Company’s retail rate plan for the three years ended December 31, 2007 (2004 Retail Rate Plan), the Company was ordered to recognize Georgia PSC—certified capacity costs in rates evenly over the three years covered by the 2004 Retail Rate Plan. The Company recorded credits to amortization of $19 million and $14 million in 2007 and 2006, respectively.2007. The retail rate plan for the three years ending December 31, 2010 (2007 Retail Rate Plan) did not include a similar order.
On August 27, 2009, the Georgia PSC approved an accounting order allowing the Company to amortize up to $324 million of its regulatory liability related to other cost of removal obligations. See Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Rate Plans” for additional information.
Asset Retirement Obligations and Other Costs of Removal
Asset retirement obligations are computed as the present value of the ultimate costs for an asset’s future retirement and are recorded in the period in which the liability is incurred. The costs are capitalized as part of the related long-lived asset and depreciated over the asset’s useful life. The Company has received accounting guidance from the Georgia PSC allowing the continued accrual of other future retirement costs for long-lived assets that the Company does not have a legal obligation to retire. Accordingly, the accumulated removal costs for these obligations will continue to beare reflected in the balance sheets as a regulatory liability. See Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Rate Plans” for additional information related to the Company’s cost of removal regulatory liability.
The liability recognized to retire long-lived assets primarily relates to the Company’s nuclear facilities, which include the Company’s ownership interests in Plants Hatch and Vogtle. The fair value of assets legally restricted for settling retirement obligations related to nuclear facilities as of December 31, 20082009 was $460$580 million. In addition, the Company has retirement obligations related to various landfill sites, ash ponds, underground storage tanks, and asbestos removal. The Company also has identified retirement obligations related to certain transmission and distribution facilities, leasehold improvements, equipment on customer property, and property associated with the Company’s rail lines. However, liabilities for the removal of these assets have not been recorded because the range of time over which the Company may settle these obligations is unknown and cannot be reasonably estimated. The Company will continue to recognize in the statements of income the allowed removal costs in accordance with its regulatory treatment. Any difference between costs recognized under FASB Statement No. 143, “Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations”in accordance with accounting standards related to asset retirement and FASB Interpretation No. 47, “Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations”environmental obligations and those reflected in rates are recognized as either a regulatory asset or liability in the balance sheets as ordered by the Georgia PSC. See “Nuclear Decommissioning” herein for further information on amounts included in rates.
Details of the asset retirement obligations included in the balance sheets are as follows:
                
 2008 2007  2009 2008 
 (in millions)  (in millions) 
Balance beginning of year $664 $627  $690 $664 
Liabilities incurred 4   2 4 
Liabilities settled  (1)  (3)  (7)  (1)
Accretion 41 40  44 41 
Cash flow revisions  (18)    (48)  (18)
Balance end of year $690 $664  $681 $690 

II-207


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Nuclear Decommissioning
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requires licensees of commercial nuclear power reactors to establish a plan for providing reasonable assurance of funds for future decommissioning. The Company has external trust funds (the Funds) to comply with the NRC’s regulations. Use of the Funds is restricted to nuclear decommissioning activities and the Funds are managed and invested in accordance with applicable requirements of various regulatory bodies, including the NRC, the FERC, and the Georgia PSC, as well as

II-209


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The Funds are required to be held by one or more trustees with an individual net worth of at least $100 million. The FERC requires the Funds’ managers to exercise the standard of care in investing that a “prudent investor” would use in the same circumstances. The FERC regulations also require, except for investments tied to market indices or other mutual funds, that the Funds’ managers may not invest in any securities of the utility for which it manages funds or its affiliates. In addition, the NRC prohibits investments in securities of power reactor licensees. While the Company is allowed to prescribe an overall investment policy to the Funds’ managers, the Company is not allowed to engage in the day-to-day management of the Funds or to mandate individual investment decisions. Day-to-day management of the investments in the Funds is delegated to unrelated third party managers with oversight by the Company’s management. The Funds’ managers are authorized, within broad limits, to actively buy and sell securities at their own discretion in order to maximize the return on the Funds’ investments. The Funds are invested in a tax-efficient manner in a diversified mix of equity and fixed income securities and are reported as of December 31, 2008 as trading securities pursuant to FASB Statement No. 115, “Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities” (SFAS No. 115).securities.
On January 1, 2008, the Company adopted FASB Statement No. 159, “Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities — Including an Amendment of FASB Statement No. 115” (SFAS No. 159). This standard permits an entity to choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other items at fair value. The Company electedrecords the fair value option only for investment securities held in the Funds. The Funds are included in the balance sheets at fair value, as disclosed in Note 10.
Management elected to continue to record the Funds at fair value because management believes that fair value best represents the nature of the Funds. Management has delegated day-to-day management of the investments in the Funds to unrelated third party managers with oversight by Southern Company and Company management. The managers of the Funds are authorized, within broad limits, to actively buy and sell securities at their own discretion in order to maximize the investment return on the Funds’ investments. Because of the Company’s inability to choose to hold securities that have experienced unrealized losses until recovery of their value, all unrealized losses incurred during 2006 and 2007, prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 159, were considered other-than-temporary impairments under SFAS No. 115.
The adoption of SFAS No. 159 had no impact on the results of operations, cash flows, or financial condition of the Company. For all periods presented, all gains Gains and losses, whether realized, unrealized, or identified as other-than-temporary, have been and will continue to beare recorded in the regulatory liability for asset retirement obligations in the balance sheets and are not included in net income or other comprehensive income. Fair value adjustments, realized gains, and other-than-temporary impairment losses are determined on a specific identification basis.
At December 31, 2009, investment securities in the Funds totaled $580.0 million consisting of equity securities of $428.6 million, debt securities of $138.0 million, and $13.4 million of other securities. At December 31, 2008, investment securities in the Funds totaled $459.1 million, consisting of equity securities of $261.4 million, debt securities of $187.3 million, and $10.4 million of other securities. These amounts exclude receivables related to investment income and pending investment sales, and payables related to pending investment purchases.
At December 31, 2007, investment securities in the Funds totaled $589.0 million consisting of equity securities of $402.4 million, debt securities of $171.8 million, and $14.8 million of other securities. Unrealized gains were $125.5 million for equity securities and $4.8 million for debt securities. Other-than-temporary impairments were $(12.2) million for equity securities and $(1.8) million for debt securities.
Sales of the securities held in the Funds resulted in cash proceeds of $984.3 million, $412.2 million, and $441.4 million in 2009, 2008, and $457.4 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively, all of which were re-invested. For 2009, fair value increases, including reinvested interest and dividends and excluding expenses, were $118.7 million, of which $117.8 million relates to securities held in the Funds at December 31, 2009. For 2008, fair value reductions, including reinvested interest and dividends and excluding expenses, were $(143.9) million, of which $(151.0) million related to securities held in the Funds at December 31, 2008.million. Realized gains and other-than-temporary impairment losses were $43.7 million and $(39.1) million, respectively, in 2007 and $17.8 million and $(12.1) million, respectively, in 2006.2007. While the investment securities held in the Funds are reported as trading securities, from the perspective of SFAS No. 115, the Funds continue to be managed with a long-term focus. Accordingly, all purchases and sales within the Funds are presented separately in the statementsstatement of cash flows as investing cash flows, consistent with the nature of and purpose for which the securities were acquired.
Amounts previously recorded in internal reserves are being transferred into the external trust funds over periods approved by the Georgia PSC. The NRC’s minimum external funding requirements are based on a generic estimate of the cost to decommission only the radioactive portions of a nuclear unit based on the size and type of reactor. The Company has filed plans with the NRC designed to ensure that, over time, the deposits and earnings of the external trust funds will provide the minimum funding amounts prescribed by the NRC.

II-208


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Site study cost is the estimate to decommission a specific facility as of the site study year. The estimated costs of decommissioning are based on the most current study performed in 2006.2009. The site study costs and accumulated provisions for decommissioning as of December 31, 20082009 based on the Company’s ownership interests were as follows:

II-210


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
         
  Plant Hatch Plant Vogtle
 
Decommissioning periods:        
Beginning year  2034   2047 
Completion year  2063   2067 
 
         
  (in millions)
Site study costs:        
Radiated structures $583  $500 
Non-radiated structures  46   71 
 
Total site study costs $629  $571 
 
         
Accumulated provision $360  $206 
 
         
  Plant Hatch Plant Vogtle
 
Decommissioning periods:        
Beginning year  2034   2027 
Completion year  2061   2051 
 
         
  (in millions)
Site study costs:        
Radiated structures $544  $507 
Non-radiated structures  46   67 
 
Total site study costs $590  $574 
 
         
Accumulated provision $280  $168 
 
The decommissioning periods and site study costs for Plant Vogtle reflect the extended operating license approved by the NRC on June 3, 2009. The decommissioning cost estimates are based on prompt dismantlement and removal of the plant from service. The actual decommissioning costs may vary from these estimates because of changes in the assumed date of decommissioning, changes in NRC requirements, or changes in the assumptions used in making these estimates.
For ratemaking purposes, the Company’s decommissioning costs are based on the NRC generic estimate to decommission the radioactive portion of the facilities. Under the 2004 Retail Rate Plan, theThe annual decommissioning costs for ratemaking were $7 million for Plant Vogtle for 2006 and 2007. Under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, effective for the years 2008 through 2010, the annual decommissioning cost for ratemaking is $3 million for Plant Vogtle. Based on estimates approved in the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, the Company projected the external trust funds for Plant Hatch would be adequate to meet the decommissioning obligations with no further contributions. The NRC estimates are $495$531 million and $334$366 million for Plants Hatch and Vogtle, respectively. Significant assumptions used to determine the costs for ratemaking include an estimated inflation rate of 2.9% and an estimated trust earnings rate of 4.9%. Another significant assumption was that the operating licenses for Plant Vogtle would remain at 40 years until a 20-year extension requested by the Company in June 2007 is authorized by the NRC. The Company anticipatesexpects the NRC will make a decision regardingGeorgia PSC to periodically review and adjust, if necessary, the license extensionamounts collected in rates for Plant Vogtle in 2009.nuclear decommissioning costs.
Allowance for Funds Used During Construction (AFUDC) and Interest Capitalized
In accordance with regulatory treatment, the Company records AFUDC, which represents the estimated debt and equity costs of capital funds that are necessary to finance the construction of new regulated facilities. While cash is not realized currently from such allowance, it increases the revenue requirement over the service life of the plant through a higher rate base and higher depreciation. The equity component of AFUDC is not included in calculating taxable income. For the years 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006,2007, the average AFUDC rates were 8.2%8.0%, 8.4%8.2%, and 8.3%8.4%, respectively, and AFUDC capitalized was $136.6 million, $135.1 million, $96.8 million, and $44.1$96.8 million, respectively. AFUDC, and interest capitalized, net of taxes, werewas 14.9%, 13.3%, 10.3%, and 5.0%10.3% of net income after dividends on preferred and preference stock for 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006,2007, respectively.
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets and Intangibles
The Company evaluates long-lived assets for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of such assets may not be recoverable. The determination of whether an impairment has occurred is based on either a specific regulatory disallowance or an estimate of undiscounted future cash flows attributable to the assets, as compared with the carrying value of the assets. If an impairment has occurred, the amount of the impairment recognized is determined by either the amount of regulatory disallowance or by estimating the fair value of the assets and recording a loss if the carrying value is greater than the fair value. For assets identified as held for sale, the carrying value is compared to the estimated fair value less the cost to sell in order to determine if an impairment loss is required. Until the assets are disposed of, their estimated fair value is re-evaluated when circumstances or events change.

II-209


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Storm Damage Reserve
The Company maintains a reserve for property damage to cover the cost of damages from major storms to its transmission and distribution lines and the cost of uninsured damages to its generation facilities and other property as mandated by the Georgia PSC. Under the 2004 Retail Rate Plan,In 2007, the Company accrued $6.6 million annually that was recoverable through base rates. Effective

II-211


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
January 1, 2008, the Company is accruing $21.4 million annually under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan. The Company expects the Georgia PSC to periodically review and adjust, if necessary, the amounts collected in rates for storm damage costs.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
For purposes of the financial statements, temporary cash investments are considered cash equivalents. Temporary cash investments are securities with original maturities of 90 days or less.
Materials and Supplies
Generally, materials and supplies include the average costs of transmission, distribution, and generating plant materials. Materials are charged to inventory when purchased and then expensed or capitalized to plant, as appropriate, at weighted average cost when installed.
Fuel Inventory
Fuel inventory includes the average costs of oil, coal, natural gas, and emissionemissions allowances. Fuel is charged to inventory when purchased and then expensed as used and recovered by the Company through fuel cost recovery rates approved by the Georgia PSC. EmissionEmissions allowances granted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are included in inventory at zero cost.
Financial Instruments
The Company uses derivative financial instruments to limit exposure to fluctuations in interest rates, the prices of certain fuel purchases, and electricity purchases and sales. All derivative financial instruments are recognized as either assets or liabilities (categorized(included in “Other” or shown separately as “Risk Management Activities”) and are measured at fair value. See Note 10 for additional information. Substantially all of the Company’s bulk energy purchases and sales contracts that meet the definition of a derivative are exempt from fair value accounting requirements and are accounted for under the accrual method. Other derivative contracts qualify as cash flow hedges of anticipated transactions or are recoverable through the Georgia PSC-approved fuel hedging program. This results in the deferral of related gains and losses in other comprehensive income or regulatory assets and liabilities, respectively, until the hedged transactions occur. Any ineffectiveness arising from cash flow hedges is recognized currently in net income. Other derivative contracts are marked to market through current period income and are recorded on a net basis in the statements of income. See Note 6 under “Financial Instruments”11 for additional information.
The Company does not offset fair value amounts recognized for multiple derivative instruments executed with the same counterparty under a master netting arrangement. Additionally, the Company has no outstanding collateral repayment obligations or rights to reclaim collateral arising from derivative instruments recognized at December 31, 2008.2009.
The Company is exposed to losses related to financial instruments in the event of counterparties’ nonperformance. The Company has established controls to determine and monitor the creditworthiness of counterparties in order to mitigate the Company’s exposure to counterparty credit risk.
The Company’s financial instruments for which the carrying amount did not equal fair value at December 31 were as follows:
         
  Carrying Amount Fair Value
 
  (in millions)
         
Long-term debt:        
2008
 $7,219  $7,096 
2007 $6,066  $5,969 
The fair values were based on either closing market prices (Level 1) or closing prices of comparable instruments (Level 2). See Note 10 for all other items recognized at fair value in the financial statements.
Comprehensive Income
The objective of comprehensive income is to report a measure of all changes in common stock equity of an enterprise that result from

II-212


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
transactions and other economic events of the period other than transactions with owners. Comprehensive income consists of net income, changes in the fair value of qualifying cash flow hedges and marketable securities, and prior to the adoption of SFAS No.158, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans” (SFAS No. 158) the minimum pension liability, less income taxes and reclassifications for amounts included in net income.

II-210


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Variable Interest Entities
The primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity must consolidate the related assets and liabilities. The Company has established certain wholly-owned trusts to issue preferred securities. However, the Company is not considered the primary beneficiary of the trusts. Therefore, the investments in these trusts are reflected as Other Investments, and the related loans from the trusts are reflected as Long-term Debt in the balance sheets. See Note 6 under “Long-Term Debt Payable to Affiliated Trusts” for additional information.
2. RETIREMENT BENEFITS
The Company has a defined benefit, trusteed, pension plan covering substantially all employees. The plan is funded in accordance with requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (ERISA). No contributions to the defined benefit plan are expected for the year ending December 31, 2009.2010. The Company also provides certain defined benefit pension plans for a selected group of management and highly compensated employees. Benefits under these non-qualified pension plans are funded on a cash basis. In addition, the Company provides certain medical care and life insurance benefits for retired employees through other postretirement benefit plans. The Company funds trusts to the extent required by the FERC. For the year ending December 31, 2009,2010, postretirement trust contributions are expected to total approximately $39$31 million.
The measurement date for plan assets and obligations for 2009 and 2008 was December 31 while the measurement date for prior years was September 30. Pursuant to SFAS No. 158,accounting standards related to defined postretirement benefit plans, the Company was required to change the measurement date for its defined postretirement benefit postretirement plans from September 30 to December 31 beginning with the year ended December 31, 2008. As permitted, the Company adopted the measurement date provisions of SFAS No. 158 effective January 1, 2008 resulting in an increase in long-term liabilities of approximately $10 million and an increase in prepaid pension costs of approximately $10 million.
Pension Plans
The total accumulated benefit obligation for the pension plans was $2.4 billion in 2009 and $2.1 billion in 2008 and $2.0 billion in 2007.2008. Changes during the plan year ended December 31, 2009 and the 15-month period ended December 31, 2008 and the 12-month period ended September 30, 2007 in the projected benefit obligations and the fair value of plan assets were as follows:
         
  2008 2007
  (in millions)
         
Change in benefit obligation
        
Benefit obligation at beginning of year $2,178  $2,136 
Service cost  62   51 
Interest cost  167   126 
Benefits paid  (133)  (98)
Plan amendments     15 
Actuarial (gain) loss  (36)  (52)
 
Balance at end of year  2,238   2,178 
 
         
Change in plan assets
        
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year  3,073   2,710 
Actual return (loss) on plan assets  (910)  456 
Employer contributions  8   5 
Benefits paid  (133)  (98)
 
Fair value of plan assets at end of year  2,038   3,073 
 
         
Funded status at end of year  (200)  895 
Fourth quarter contributions     2 
 
(Accrued liability) prepaid pension asset $(200) $897 
 

II-213


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
         
  2009 2008
  (in millions)
         
Change in benefit obligation
        
Benefit obligation at beginning of year $2,238  $2,178 
Service cost  48   62 
Interest cost  147   167 
Benefits paid  (122)  (133)
Actuarial loss (gain)  206   (36)
 
Balance at end of year  2,517   2,238 
 
         
Change in plan assets
        
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year  2,038   3,073 
Actual return (loss) on plan assets  314   (910)
Employer contributions  7   8 
Benefits paid  (122)  (133)
 
Fair value of plan assets at end of year  2,237   2,038 
 
Accrued liability $(280) $(200)
 
At December 31, 2008,2009, the projected benefit obligations for the qualified and non-qualified pension plans were $2.1$2.4 billion and $128$135 million, respectively. All pension plan assets are related to the qualified pension plan.

II-211


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Pension plan assets are managed and invested in accordance with all applicable requirements, including ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Internal Revenue Code). In 2009, in determining the optimal asset allocation for the pension fund, the Company performed an extensive study based on projections of both assets and liabilities over a 10-year forward horizon. The primary goal of the study was to maximize plan funded status. The Company’s investment policy covers a diversified mix of assets, including equity and fixed income securities, real estate, and private equity. Derivative instruments are used primarily as hedging tools but may also be used to gain efficient exposure to the various asset classes.classes and as hedging tools. The Company primarily minimizes the risk of large losses primarily through diversification but also monitors and manages other aspects of risk.
The actual composition of the Company’s pension plan assets as of the end of year,December 31, 2009 and 2008, along with the targeted mix of assets, is presented below:
                        
 Target 2008 2007 Target 2009 2008
Domestic equity  36%  34%  38%  29%  33%  34%
International equity 24 23 24  28 29 23 
Fixed income 15 14 15  15 15 14 
Real estate 15 19 16 
Special situations 3   
Real estate investments 15 13 19 
Private equity 10 10 7  10 10 10 
Total  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%
The investment strategy for plan assets related to the Company’s defined benefit plan is to be broadly diversified across major asset classes. The asset allocation is established after consideration of various factors that affect the assets and liabilities of the pension plan including, but not limited to, historical and expected returns, volatility, correlations of asset classes, the current level of assets and liabilities, and the assumed growth in assets and liabilities. Because a significant portion of the liability of the pension plan is long-term in nature, the assets are invested consistent with long-term investment expectations for return and risk. To manage the actual asset class exposures relative to the target asset allocation, the Company employs a formal rebalancing program. As additional risk management, external investment managers and service providers are subject to written guidelines to ensure appropriate and prudent investment practices.
Detailed below is a description of the investment strategies for each major asset category disclosed above:
Domestic equity.This portion of the portfolio comprises a mix of large and small capitalization stocks with generally an equal distribution of value and growth attributes managed both actively and through passive index approaches.
International equity.This portion of the portfolio is actively managed with a blend of growth stocks and value stocks with both developed and emerging market exposure.
Fixed income.This portion of the portfolio is actively managed through an allocation to long-dated, investment grade corporate and government bonds.
Special situations.Though currently unfunded, this portion of the portfolio was established both to execute opportunistic investment strategies with the objectives of diversifying and enhancing returns and exploiting short-term inefficiencies, as well as to invest in promising new strategies of a longer-term nature.
Real estate investments.Assets in this portion of the portfolio are invested in traditional private market, equity-oriented investments in real properties (indirectly through pooled funds or partnerships) and in publicly traded real estate securities.
Private equity.This portion of the portfolio generally consists of investments in private partnerships that invest in private or public securities typically through privately negotiated and/or structured transactions. Leveraged buyouts, venture capital, and distressed debt are examples of investment strategies within this category.

II-212


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The fair values of pension plan assets as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 are presented below. These fair value measurements exclude cash, receivables related to investment income, pending investments sales, and payables related to pending investment purchases.
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using    
  Quoted Prices         
  in Active Significant     
  Markets for Other Significant   
  Identical Observable Unobservable   
  Assets Inputs Inputs   
As of December 31, 2009: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total 
  (in millions) 
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $444  $184  $  $628 
International equity*  574   57      631 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     165      165 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     45      45 
Corporate bonds     111      111 
Pooled funds     4      4 
Cash equivalents and other  1   136      137 
Special situations            
Real estate investments  69      217   286 
Private equity        221   221 
 
Total $1,088  $702  $438  $2,228 
 
Liabilities:                
Derivatives  (2)        (2)
 
Total $1,086  $702  $438  $2,226 
 
*  Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well-diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using    
  Quoted Prices         
  in Active Significant      
  Markets for Other Significant   
  Identical Observable Unobservable   
  Assets Inputs Inputs   
As of December 31, 2008: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total 
      (in millions)     
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $419  $171  $  $590 
International equity*  377   35      412 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     176      176 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     84      84 
Corporate bonds     114      114 
Pooled funds     1      1 
Cash equivalents and other  9   81      90 
Special situations            
Real estate investments  58      336   394 
Private equity        196   196 
 
Total $863  $662  $532  $2,057 
 
Liabilities:                
Derivatives  (3)        (3)
 
Total $860  $662  $532  $2,054 
 
*  Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well-diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.

II-213


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Changes in the fair value measurement of the Level 3 items in the pension plan assets valued using significant unobservable inputs for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:
                 
  2009 2008 
  Real Estate     Real Estate  
  Investments Private Equity Investments Private Equity
      (in millions)    
Beginning balance $336  196  418  208 
Actual return on investments:                
Related to investments held at year end  (98)  14   (68)  (56)
Related to investments sold during the year  (26)  4   2   10 
 
Total return on investments  (124)  18   (66)  (46)
Purchases, sales, and settlements  5   7   (16)  34 
Transfers into/out of Level 3            
 
Ending balance $217  221  336  196 
 
The fair values presented above are prepared in accordance with applicable accounting standards regarding fair value. For purposes of determining the fair value of the pension plan assets and the appropriate level designation, management relies on information provided by the plan’s trustee. This information is reviewed and evaluated by management with changes made to the trustee information as appropriate.
Securities for which the activity is observable on an active market or traded exchange are categorized as Level 1. Fixed income securities classified as Level 2 are valued utilizing matrix pricing, a common model utilizing observable inputs. Domestic and international equity securities classified as Level 2 consist of pooled funds where the value is not quoted on an exchange but where the value is determined using observable inputs from the market. Securities that are valued using unobservable inputs are classified as Level 3 and include investments in real estate and investments in limited partnerships. The Company invests (through the pension plan trustee) directly in the limited partnerships which then invest in various types of funds or various private entities within a fund. The fair value of the limited partnerships’ investments is based on audited annual capital accounts statements which are generally prepared on a fair value basis. The Company also relies on the fact that, in most instances, the underlying assets held by the limited partnerships are reported at fair value. External investment managers typically send valuations to both the custodian and to the Company within 90 days of quarter end. The custodian reports the most recent value available and adjusts the value for cash flows since the statement date for each respective fund.
Amounts recognized in the balance sheets related to the Company’s pension plans consist of the following:
         
  2008 2007
  (in millions)
Prepaid pension costs $  $1,027 
Other regulatory assets  642   64 
Current liabilities, other  (7)  (7)
Other regulatory liabilities     (540)
Employee benefit obligations  (193)  (123)
 
         
  2009 2008
  (in millions)
Other regulatory assets, deferred $734  $642 
Current liabilities, other  (8)  (7)
Employee benefit obligations  (272)  (193)
 
Presented below are the amounts included in regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities at December 31, 20082009 and 20072008 related to the defined benefit pension plans that had not yet been recognized in net periodic pension cost along with the estimated amortization of such amounts for 2009.2010.
         
  Prior Service Cost Net (Gain) Loss
  (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2008:
        
Regulatory asset $87  $555 
 
Total $87  $555 
 
         
  (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2007:
        
Regulatory asset $24  $40 
Regulatory liabilities  81   (621)
 
Total $105  $(581)
 
         
  (in millions)
Estimated amortization in net periodic pension cost in 2009:
        
Regulatory assets $14  $2 
 
Total $14  $2 
 
         
  Prior Service Cost Net(Gain)Loss
  (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2009:
 $73  $661 
 
         
Balance at December 31, 2008:
 $87  $555 
 
         
Estimated amortization in net periodic pension cost in 2010:
 $13  $2 
 

II-214


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
The changes in the balances of regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities related to the defined benefit pension plans for the 15-month periodyear ended December 31, 20082009 and the 12-month period15 months ended September 30, 2007December 31, 2008 are presented in the following table:
                
 Regulatory Assets Regulatory Liabilities Regulatory Assets Regulatory Liabilities
 (in millions) (in millions) 
Balance at December 31, 2006
 $56 $(218)
Net (gain) loss  (1)  (311)
Change in prior service costs 15  
Reclassification adjustments: 
Amortization of prior service costs  (3)  (11)
Amortization of net gain  (3)  
Total reclassification adjustments  (6)  (11)
Total change 8  (322)
Balance at December 31, 2007
 $64 $(540) $64 $(540)
Net (gain) loss 585 554 
Change in prior service costs   
Net loss 585 554 
Reclassification adjustments:  
Amortization of prior service costs  (4)  (14)  (4)  (14)
Amortization of net gain  (3)    (3)  
Total reclassification adjustments  (7)  (14)  (7)  (14)
Total change 578 540  578 540 
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $642 $  $642 $ 
Net loss 108  
Reclassification adjustments: 
Amortization of prior service costs  (14)  
Amortization of net gain  (2)  
Total reclassification adjustments  (16)  
Total change 92  
Balance at December 31, 2009
 $734 $ 
Components of net periodic pension cost (income) were as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
Service cost $49 $51 $53  $48 $49 $51 
Interest cost 134 126 117  147 134 126 
Expected return on plan assets  (211)  (195)  (184)  (216)  (211)  (195)
Recognized net (gain) loss 3 3 6 
Recognized net loss 2 3 3 
Net amortization 14 14 8  14 14 14 
Net periodic pension cost (income) $(11) $(1) $  $(5) $(11) $(1)
Net periodic pension cost (income) is the sum of service cost, interest cost, and other costs netted against the expected return on plan assets. The expected return on plan assets is determined by multiplying the expected rate of return on plan assets and the market-related value of plan assets. In determining the market-related value of plan assets, the Company has elected to amortize changes in the market value of all plan assets over five years rather than recognize the changes immediately. As a result, the accounting value of plan assets that is used to calculate the expected return on plan assets differs from the current fair value of the plan assets.
Future benefit payments reflect expected future service and are estimated based on assumptions used to measure the projected benefit obligation for the pension plans. At December 31, 2008,2009, estimated benefit payments were as follows:
        
 Benefit Payments Benefit Payments
 (in millions) (in millions)
2009 $118 
2010 124  $135 
2011 130  140 
2012 136  144 
2013 143  151 
2014 to 2018 841 
2014 162 
2015 to 2019 929 

II-215


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Other Postretirement Benefits
Changes during the plan year ended December 31, 2009 and the 15-month period ended December 31, 2008 and the 12-month period ended September 30, 2007 in the accumulated postretirement benefit obligations (APBO) and in the fair value of plan assets were as follows:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 (in millions) (in millions)
  
Change in benefit obligation
  
Benefit obligation at beginning of year $798 $807  $772 $798 
Service cost 13 10  10 13 
Interest cost 61 47  50 61 
Benefits paid  (47)  (35)  (43)  (47)
Actuarial (gain) loss  (57)  (33)
Actuarial loss (gain) 8  (57)
Plan amendments  (18)  
Retiree drug subsidy 4 2  3 4 
Balance at end of year 772 798  782 772 
  
Change in plan assets
  
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year 427 388  312 427 
Actual return on plan assets  (131) 54 
Actual return (loss) on plan assets 66  (131)
Employer contributions 59 18  31 59 
Benefits paid  (43)  (33)  (40)  (43)
Fair value of plan assets at end of year 312 427  369 312 
Funded status at end of year  (460)  (371)
Fourth quarter contributions  31 
Accrued liability $(413) $(460)
Accrued liability (recognized in the balance sheets) $(460) $(340)
Other postretirement benefit plan assets are managed and invested in accordance with all applicable requirements, including ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code. The Company’s investment policy covers a diversified mix of assets, including equity and fixed income securities, real estate, and private equity. Derivative instruments are used primarily as hedging tools but may also be used to gain efficient exposure to the various asset classes.classes and as hedging tools. The Company primarily minimizes the risk of large losses primarily through diversification but also monitors and manages other aspects of risk. The actual composition of the Company’s other postretirement benefit plan assets as of the end of the year, along with the targeted mix of assets, is presented below:
                        
 Target 2008 2007 Target 2009 2008
Domestic equity  43%  38%  46%  41%  34%  38%
International equity 21 21 23  22 29 21 
Fixed income 31 35 25  31 32 35 
Real estate 3 4 4 
Special situations 1   
Real estate investments 3 3 4 
Private equity 2 2 2  2 2 2 
Total  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%
Detailed below is a description of the investment strategies for each major asset category disclosed above:
Domestic equity.This portion of the portfolio comprises a mix of large and small capitalization stocks with generally an equal distribution of value and growth attributes managed both actively and through passive index approaches.
International equity.This portion of the portfolio is actively managed with a blend of growth stocks and value stocks with both developed and emerging market exposure.
Fixed income.This portion of the portfolio comprises both domestic and international bonds.
Special situations.Though currently unfunded, this portion of the portfolio was established both to execute opportunistic investment strategies with the objectives of diversifying and enhancing returns and exploiting short-term inefficiencies, as well as to invest in promising new strategies of a longer-term nature.
Trust-owned life insurance.Some of the Company’s taxable trusts invest in these investments in order to minimize the impact of taxes on the portfolio.
Real estate investments.Assets in this portion of the portfolio are invested in traditional private market, equity-oriented investments in real properties (indirectly through pooled funds or partnerships) and in publicly traded real estate securities.

II-216


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Private equity.This portion of the portfolio generally consists of investments in private partnerships that invest in private or public securities typically through privately negotiated and/or structured transactions. Leveraged buyouts, venture capital, and distressed debt are examples of investment strategies within this category.
The fair values of other postretirement benefit plan assets as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 are presented below. These fair value measurements exclude cash, receivables related to investment income, pending investments sales, and payables related to pending investment purchases.
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using    
  Quoted Prices         
  in Active Significant      
  Markets for Other Significant   
  Identical Observable Unobservable   
  Assets Inputs Inputs   
  As of December 31, 2009: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total 
  (in millions) 
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $82  $29  $  $111 
International equity*  20   31      51 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     5      5 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     2      2 
Corporate bonds     4      4 
Pooled funds     17      17 
Cash equivalents and other     26      26 
Trust-owned life insurance     126      126 
Special situations            
Real estate investments  2      8   10 
Private equity        8   8 
 
Total $104  $240  $16  $360 
 
*  Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well-diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using    
  Quoted Prices         
  in Active Significant      
  Markets for Other Significant   
  Identical Observable Unobservable   
  Assets Inputs Inputs   
  As of December 31, 2008: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total 
  (in millions) 
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $69  $34  $  $103 
International equity*  13   21      34 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     5      5 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     3      3 
Corporate bonds     4      4 
Pooled funds     9      9 
Cash equivalents and other     22      22 
Trust-owned life insurance     110      110 
Special situations            
Real estate investments  2      12   14 
Private equity        7   7 
 
Total $84  $208  $19  $311 
 
*  Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well-diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.

II-217


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Changes in the fair value measurement of the Level 3 items in the other postretirement benefit plan assets valued using significant unobservable inputs for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:
                 
  2009 2008
  Real Estate     Real Estate  
  Investments Private Equity Investments Private Equity
  (in millions) 
Beginning balance $12  $7  $14  $7 
Actual return on investments:                
Related to investments held at year end  (3)  1   (1)  (1)
Related to investments sold during the year  (1)         
 
Total return on investments  (4)  1   (1)  (1)
Purchases, sales, and settlements        (1)  1 
Transfers into/out of Level 3            
 
Ending balance $8  $8  $12  $7 
 
The fair values presented above are prepared in accordance with applicable accounting standards regarding fair value. For purposes of determining the fair value of the pension plan assets and the appropriate level designation, management relies on information provided by the plan’s trustee. This information is reviewed and evaluated by management with changes made to the trustee information as appropriate.
Securities for which the activity is observable on an active market or traded exchange are categorized as Level 1. Fixed income securities classified as Level 2 are valued utilizing matrix pricing, a common model utilizing observable inputs. Domestic and international equity securities classified as Level 2 consist of pooled funds where the value is not quoted on an exchange but where the value is determined using observable inputs from the market. Securities that are valued using unobservable inputs are classified as Level 3 and include investments in real estate and investments in limited partnerships. The Company invests (through the pension plan trustee) directly in the limited partnerships which then invest in various types of funds or various private entities within a fund. The fair value of the limited partnerships’ investments is based on audited annual capital accounts statements which are generally prepared on a fair value basis. The Company also relies on the fact that, in most instances, the underlying assets held by the limited partnerships are reported at fair value. External investment managers typically send valuations to both the custodian and to the Company within 90 days of quarter end. The custodian reports the most recent value available and adjusts the value for cash flows since the statement date for each respective fund.
Amounts recognized in the balance sheets related to the Company’s other postretirement benefit plans consist of the following:
         
  2008 2007
  (in millions)
Other regulatory assets $261  $171 
Employee benefit obligations  (460)  (340)
 

II-216


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
         
  2009 2008
  (in millions)
Other regulatory assets, deferred $202  $261 
Employee benefit obligations  (413)  (460)
 
Presented below are the amounts included in regulatory assets at December 31, 20082009 and 20072008 related to the other postretirement benefit plans that had not yet been recognized in net periodic postretirement benefit cost along with the estimated amortization of such amounts for 2009.2010.
             
  Prior Service Net Transition
  Cost (Gain) Loss Obligation
  (in millions)
             
Balance at December 31, 2008:
            
Regulatory assets $20  $198  $43 
 
             
Balance at December 31, 2007:
            
Regulatory assets $22  $94  $55 
 
             
Estimated amortization in net periodic postretirement benefit cost in 2009:
            
Regulatory assets $2  $4  $9 
 
             
  Prior Service Net(Gain) Transition
  Cost Loss Obligation
  (in millions)
 
Balance at December 31, 2009:
 $11  $167  $24 
 
             
Balance at December 31, 2008:
 $20  $198  $43 
 
             
Estimated amortization as net periodic postretirement benefit cost in 2010:
 $1  $3  $6 
 

II-218


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The changecomponents of other comprehensive income, along with the changes in the balance of regulatory assets, related to the other postretirement benefit plans for the 15-month periodplan year ended December 31, 2009 and the 15 months ended December 31, 2008 and the 12-month period ended September 30, 2007 isare presented in the following table:
        
 Regulatory Assets Regulatory Assets
 (in millions) (in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2006
 $254 
Net (gain) loss  (64)
Change in prior service costs  
Reclassification adjustments: 
Amortization of transition obligation  (9)
Amortization of prior service costs  (2)
Amortization of net gain  (8)
Total reclassification adjustments  (19)
Total change  (83)
Balance at December 31, 2007
 $171  $171 
Net (gain) loss 110 
Change in prior service costs  
Net loss 110 
Reclassification adjustments:  
Amortization of transition obligation  (11)  (11)
Amortization of prior service costs  (3)  (3)
Amortization of net gain  (6)  (6)
Total reclassification adjustments  (20)  (20)
Total change 90  90 
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $261  $261 
Net gain  (28)
Change in prior service costs/transition obligation  (18)
Reclassification adjustments: 
Amortization of transition obligation  (8)
Amortization of prior service costs  (2)
Amortization of net gain  (3)
Total reclassification adjustments  (13)
Total change  (59)
Balance at December 31, 2009
 $202 
Components of the other postretirement benefit plans’ net periodic cost were as follows:
             
  2008 2007 2006
  (in millions)
Service cost $10  $10  $11 
Interest cost  50   47   44 
Expected return on plan assets  (30)  (26)  (25)
Net amortization  16   19   22 
 
Net postretirement cost $46  $50  $52 
 

II-217


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
             
  2009 2008 2007
  (in millions)
Service cost $10  $10  $10 
Interest cost  50   50   47 
Expected return on plan assets  (30)  (30)  (26)
Net amortization  13   16   19 
 
Net postretirement cost $43  $46  $50 
 
The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Medicare Act) provides a 28% prescription drug subsidy for Medicare eligible retirees. The effect of the subsidy reduced the Company’s expenses for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007 by approximately $14 million, $14 million, and $16$14 million, respectively.respectively, and is expected to have a similar impact on future expenses.
Future benefit payments, including prescription drug benefits, reflect expected future service and are estimated based on assumptions used to measure the APBO for the postretirement plans. Estimated benefit payments are reduced by drug subsidy receipts expected as a result of the Medicare Act as follows:
                        
 Benefit Payments Subsidy Receipts Total Benefit Payments Subsidy Receipts Total
 (in millions) (in millions)
2009 $45 $(3) $42 
2010 50  (4) 46  $50 $(4) $46 
2011 54  (5) 49  53  (4) 49 
2012 57  (5) 52  56  (4) 52 
2013 60  (6) 54  58  (5) 53 
2014 to 2018 334  (41) 293 
2014 60  (6) 54 
2015 to 2019 317  (38) 279 

II-219


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Actuarial Assumptions
The weighted average rates assumed in the actuarial calculations used to determine both the benefit obligations as of the measurement date and the net periodic costs for the pension and other postretirement benefit plans for the following year are presented below. Net periodic benefit costs were calculated in 20052006 for the 20062007 plan year using a discount rate of 5.50%6.00% and an annual salary increase of 3.50%.
             
  2008 2007 2006
 
Discount  6.75%  6.30%  6.00%
Annual salary increase  3.75   3.75   3.50 
Long-term return on plan assets  8.50   8.50   8.50 
 
             
  2009 2008 2007
 
Discount rate:            
Pension plans  5.93%  6.75%  6.30%
Other postretirement benefit plans  5.83   6.75   6.30 
Annual salary increase  4.18   3.75   3.75 
Long-term return on plan assets:            
Pension plans  8.50   8.50   8.50 
Other postretirement benefit plans  7.35   7.38   7.37 
 
The Company determinedestimates the long-termexpected rate of return on pension plan and other postretirement benefit plan assets using a financial model to project the expected return on each current investment portfolio. The analysis projects an expected rate of return on each of seven different asset classes in order to arrive at the expected return on the entire portfolio relying on each trust’s target asset allocation and reasonable capital market assumptions. The financial model is based on historicalfour key inputs: anticipated returns by asset class returns(based in part on historical returns), each trust’s asset allocation, an anticipated inflation rate, and current market conditions, taking into account the diversification benefitsprojected impact of investing in multiple asset classes.a periodic rebalancing of each trust’s portfolio.
An additional assumption used in measuring the APBO was a weighted average medical care cost trend rate of 9.15%8.50% for 2009,2010, decreasing gradually to 5.50%5.25% through the year 20152016 and remaining at that level thereafter. An annual increase or decrease in the assumed medical care cost trend rate of 1% would affect the APBO and the service and interest cost components at December 31, 20082009 as follows:
                
 1 Percent 1 Percent 1 Percent 1 Percent
 Increase Decrease Increase Decrease
 (in millions) (in millions)
Benefit obligation $61 $61  $58 $51 
Service and interest costs $4 $4  4 4 
Employee Savings Plan
The Company also sponsors a 401(k) defined contribution plan covering substantially all employees. The Company provides an 85% matching contribution up to 6% of an employee’s base salary. Prior to November 2006, the Company matched employee contributions at a rate of 75% up to 6% of the employee’s base salary. Total matching contributions made to the plan for 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007 were $25 million, $25 million, and $24 million, and $21 million, respectively.

II-218


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
3. CONTINGENCIES AND REGULATORY MATTERS
General Litigation Matters
The Company is subject to certain claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. In addition, the Company’s business activities are subject to extensive governmental regulation related to public health and the environment.environment such as regulation of air emissions and water discharges. Litigation over environmental issues and claims of various types, including property damage, personal injury, common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of environmental requirements such as opacity and air and water quality standards, has increased generally throughout the United States. In particular, personal injury and other claims for damages caused by alleged exposure to hazardous materials, and common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas and other emissions, have become more frequent. The ultimate outcome of such pending or potential litigation against the Company cannot be predicted at this time; however, for current proceedings not specifically reported herein, management does not anticipate that the liabilities, if any, arising from such current proceedings would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial statements.

II-220


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Environmental Matters
New Source Review Actions
In November 1999, the EPA brought a civil action in the U.S.DistrictU.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, including the Company, alleging that these subsidiaries had violated the New Source Review (NSR) provisions of the Clean Air Act and related state laws at certain coal-fired generating facilities includingfacilities. The action was filed concurrently with the Company’s Plants Bowen and Scherer.issuance of a notice of violation of the NSR provisions to the Company. After Alabama Power was dismissed from the original action, for jurisdictional reasons, the EPA filed a separate action in January 2001 against Alabama Power in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. In these lawsuits, the EPA allegedalleges that NSR violations occurred at eight coal-fired generating facilities operated by Alabama Power and the Company. The civil actions request penalties and injunctive relief, including an order requiring installation of the best available control technology at the affected units. The original action, now solely against the Company, has been administratively closed since the spring of 2001, and the case has not been reopened.
In June 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama entered a consent decree between Alabama Power and the EPA, resolving a portion of the Alabama Power lawsuit relating to the alleged NSR violations at Plant Miller. The consent decree required Alabama Power to pay $100,000 to resolve the government’s claim for a civil penalty and to donate $4.9 million of sulfur dioxide emission allowances to a nonprofit charitable organization. It also formalized specific emissions reductions to be accomplished by Alabama Power, consistent with other Clean Air Act programs that require emissions reductions. In August 2006, the district court in Alabama granted Alabama Power’s motion for summary judgment and entered final judgment in favor of Alabama Power on the EPA’s claims related to all of the remaining plants: Plants Barry, Gaston, Gorgas, and Greene County.
The plaintiffs appealed the district court’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, where it was stayed, pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in a similar case against Duke Energy. The Supreme Court issued its decision in the Duke Energy case in April 2007, and in December 2007, the Eleventh Circuit vacated the district court’s decision in the Alabama Power case and remanded the case back to the district court for consideration of the legal issues in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Duke Energy case. On July 24, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama granted partial summary judgment in favor of Alabama Power with respect to its other affected units regarding the proper legal test for determining whether projects are routine maintenance, repair, and replacement and therefore are excluded from NSR permitting. The decision did not resolve the case.case, which remains ongoing.
The Company believes that it complied with applicable laws and the EPA regulations and interpretations in effect at the time the work in question took place. The Clean Air Act authorizes maximum civil penalties of $25,000 to $37,500 per day, per violation at each generating unit, depending on the date of the alleged violation. An adverse outcome in this matter could require substantial capital expenditures or affect the timing of currently budgeted capital expenditures that cannot be determined at this time and could possibly require payment of substantial penalties. Such expenditures could affect future results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates. The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.

II-219


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Carbon Dioxide Litigation
New York Case
In July 2004, three environmental groups and attorneys general from eight states, each outside of Southern Company’s service territory, and the corporation counsel for New York City filed complaints in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against Southern Company and four other electric power companies. The complaints allege that the companies’ emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, contribute to global warming, which the plaintiffs assert is a public nuisance. Under common law public and private nuisance theories, the plaintiffs seek a judicial order (1) holding each defendant jointly and severally liable for creating, contributing to, and/or maintaining global warming and (2) requiring each of the defendants to cap its emissions of carbon dioxide and then reduce those emissions by a specified percentage each year for at least a decade. The plaintiffs have not, however, requested that damages be awarded in connection with their claims. Southern Company believes these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. In September 2005, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted Southern Company’s and the other defendants’ motions to dismiss these cases. The plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in October 2005 but no decision has been issued. Theand, on September 21, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the district court’s ruling, vacating the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claim, and remanding the case to the district court. On November 5, 2009, the defendants, including Southern Company, sought rehearing en banc, and the court’s ruling is subject to potential appeal. Therefore, the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Kivalina Case
OnIn February 26, 2008, the Native Village of Kivalina and the City of Kivalina filed a suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against several electric utilities (including Southern Company), several oil companies, and a coal company. The plaintiffs are the governing bodies of an Inupiat village in Alaska. The plaintiffs contend that the village is being destroyed by erosion allegedly caused by global warming that the plaintiffs attribute to emissions of greenhouse gases by the defendants. The plaintiffs assert claims for public and private nuisance and contend that some of the defendants have acted in concert and are therefore jointly and severally liable for the plaintiffs’ damages. The suit seeks damages for lost property values and for the cost of relocating the village, which is alleged to be $95 million to $400 million. On June 30, 2008, all defendants filed motions to dismiss this case. Southern Company believes that these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. On September 30, 2009, the U.S. District Court for the

II-221


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Northern District of California granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss the case based on lack of jurisdiction and ruled the claims were barred by the political question doctrine and by the plaintiffs’ failure to establish the standard for determining that the defendants’ conduct caused the injury alleged. On November 5, 2009, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit challenging the district court’s order dismissing the case. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Other Litigation
Common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas emissions have become more frequent, and courts have recently determined that private parties and states have standing to bring such claims. For example, on October 16, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi’s dismissal of private party claims against certain oil, coal, chemical, and utility companies alleging damages as a result of Hurricane Katrina. In reversing the dismissal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that plaintiffs have standing to assert their nuisance, trespass, and negligence claims and none of these claims are barred by the political question doctrine. The Company is not currently a party to this litigation but was named as a defendant in an amended complaint which was rendered moot in August 2007 by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi when such court dismissed the original matter. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Environmental Remediation
The Company must comply with environmental laws and regulations that cover the handling and disposal of waste and releases of hazardous substances. Under these various laws and regulations, the Company may also incur substantial costs to clean up properties.
ThroughIn 2007, the Company recovered environmental costs through its base rates. Beginning in 2005, suchCompany’s rates included an annual accrual of $5.4 million for environmental remediation. Beginning in January 2008, the Company is recovering environmental remediation costs through a new base rate tariff (see “Retail Regulatory Matters — Rate Plans” herein) that includes an annual accrual of $1.2 million for environmental remediation. Environmental remediation expenditures are charged against the reserve as they are incurred. The annual accrual amount willis expected to be reviewed and adjusted in future regulatory proceedings. Under Georgia PSC ratemaking provisions, $22 million had previously been deferred in a regulatory liability account for use in meeting future environmental remediation costs of the Company and was amortized over a three-year period that ended December 31, 2007. As of December 31, 2008,2009, the balance of the environmental remediation liability was $10.1$12.5 million.
The Company has been designated or identified as a potentially responsible party (PRP) at sites governed by the Georgia Hazardous Site Response Act and/or by the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), including a large site in Brunswick, Georgia on the CERCLA National Priorities List (NPL). The parties have completed the removal of wastes from the Brunswick site as ordered by the EPA. Additional claims for recovery of natural resource damages at this site or for the assessment and potential cleanup of other sites on the Georgia Hazardous Sites Inventory and the CERCLA NPL are anticipated. The final outcome of these matters cannot now be determined. Based on the currently known conditions at these sites and the nature and extent of activities relating to these sites, management does not believe that additional liabilities, if any, at these sites would be material to the financial statements.
By letter dated September 30, 2008, the EPA advised the Company that it has been designated as a PRP at the Ward Transformer Superfund site located in Raleigh, North Carolina. Numerous other entities have also received notices from the EPA. The Company, along with other named PRPs, will participate in negotiationsis negotiating with the EPA to address cleanup of the site and reimbursement for the EPA’s past expenditures related to work performed at the site. In addition, on April 30, 2009, two PRPs filed separate actions in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina against numerous other PRPs, including the Company, seeking contribution from the defendants for expenses incurred by the plaintiffs related to work performed at a portion of the site. The ultimate outcome of this matterthese matters will depend upon further environmental assessment and the ultimate number of PRPs and cannot be determined at this time; however, it is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements.

II-220


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
FERC Matters
Market-Based Rate Authority
The Company has authorization from the FERC to sell power to non-affiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices. Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based contract with an affiliate.
In December 2004, the FERC initiated a proceeding to assess Southern Company’s generation dominancemarket power within its retail service territory. The ability to charge market-based rates in other markets iswas not an issue in the proceeding. Any new market-based rate sales by the Company in Southern Company’s retail service territory entered into during a 15-month refund period that ended in May 2006 could behave been subject to refund to a cost-based rate level.

II-222


In November 2007, the presiding administrative law judge issued an initial decision regarding the methodology to be used in the generation dominance tests. The proceedings are ongoing. The ultimate outcome of this generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined, but an adverse decision by
NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
On December 23, 2009, Southern Company and the FERC trial staff reached an agreement in a final order couldprinciple that would resolve the proceeding in its entirety. The agreement does not reflect any finding or suggestion that the Company possesses or has exercised any market power. The agreement likewise does not require the Company to charge cost-based rates for certain wholesalemake any refunds related to sales during the 15-month refund period. Under the agreement, the Company will donate $0.7 million to nonprofit organizations in the Southern CompanyState of Georgia for the purpose of offsetting the electricity bills of low-income retail service territory, which may be lower than negotiated market-based rates, and could also result in total refunds of up to $5.8 million, plus interest.customers. The Company believes that thereagreement is no meritorious basis for an adverse decision in this proceeding and is vigorously defending itself in this matter.
In June 2007, the FERC issued its final rule in Order No. 697 regarding market-based rate authority. The FERC generally retained its current market-based rate standards. Responding to a number of requests for rehearing, the FERC issued Order No. 697-A on April 21, 2008 and Order No. 697-B on December 12, 2008. These orders largely affirmed the FERC’s prior revision and codification of the regulations governing market-based rates for public utilities. In accordance with the orders, Southern Company submitted to the FERC an updated market power analysis on September 2, 2008 related to its continued market-based rate authority. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
On October 17, 2008, Southern Company filed with the FERC a revised market-based rate (MBR) tariff and a new cost-based rate (CBR) tariff. The revised MBR tariff provides for a “must offer” energy auction whereby Southern Company offers all of its available energy for sale in a day-ahead auction and an hour-ahead auction with reserve prices not to exceed the CBR tariff price, after considering Southern Company’s native load requirements, reliability obligations, and sales commitments to third parties. All sales under the energy auction would be at market clearing prices established under the auction rules. The new CBR tariff provides for a cost-based price for wholesale sales of less than a year. On December 18, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the MBR tariff subject to certain revisions toreview and approval by the auction proposal. On January 21, 2009, Southern Company made a compliance filing that accepted all the conditions of the MBR tariff order. When this order becomes final, Southern Company will have 30 days to implement the wholesale auction. On December 31, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the CBR tariff subject to providing additional information concerning one aspect of the tariff. On January 30, 2009, Southern Company filed a response addressing the FERC inquiry to the CBR tariff order. Implementation of the energy auction in accordance with the MBR tariff order is expected to adequately mitigate going forward any presumption of market power that Southern Company may have in the Southern Company retail service territory. The timing of when the FERC may issue the final orders on the MBR and CBR tariffs and the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.FERC.
Intercompany Interchange Contract
The Company’s generation fleet is operated under the Intercompany Interchange Contract (IIC), as approved by the FERC. In May 2005, the FERC initiated a new proceeding to examine (1) the provisions of the IIC among the traditional operating companies (including the Company), Southern Power, and SCS, as agent, under the terms of which the power pool of Southern Company is operated, (2) whether any parties to the IIC have violated the FERC’s standards of conduct applicable to utility companies that are transmission providers, and (3) whether Southern Company’s code of conduct defining Southern Power as a “system company” rather than a “marketing affiliate” is just and reasonable. In connection with the formation of Southern Power, the FERC authorized Southern Power’s inclusion in the IIC in 2000. The FERC also previously approved Southern Company’s code of conduct.
In October 2006, the FERC issued an order accepting a settlement resolving the proceeding subject to Southern Company’s agreement to accept certain modifications to the settlement’s terms andterms. Southern Company notified the FERC that it accepted the modifications. The modifications largely involve functional separation and information restrictions related to marketing activities conducted on behalf of Southern Power. In November 2006, Southern Company filed with the FERC a compliance plan in connection with the

II-221


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
order. In April 2007, the FERC approved, with certain modifications, the plan submitted by Southern Company. Implementation of the plan did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements. In November 2007, Southern Company notified the FERC that the plan had been implemented. OnIn December 12, 2008, the FERC division of audits issued for public comment its final audit report pertaining to compliance implementation and related matters. No comments were submitted challenging the audit report’s findings were submitted. Aof Southern Company’s compliance. The proceeding remains open pending a decision is now pending from the FERC.
Generation Interconnection Agreements
In November 2004, generator company subsidiaries of Tenaska, Inc. (Tenaska), as counterparties to three previously executed interconnection agreements with subsidiaries of Southern Company, includingFERC regarding the Company, filed complaints at the FERC requesting that the FERC modify the agreements and that the Company refund a total of $7.9 million previously paid for interconnection facilities. No other similar complaints are pending with the FERC.
In January 2007, the FERC issued an order granting Tenaska’s requested relief. Although the FERC’s order required the modification of Tenaska’s interconnection agreements, under the provisions of the order the Company determined that no refund was payable to Tenaska. The Company requested rehearing asserting that the FERC retroactively applied a new principle to existing interconnection agreements. Tenaska requested rehearing of FERC’s methodology for determining the amount of refunds. The requested rehearings were denied and the Company and Tenaska have appealed the orders to the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia. The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.audit report.
Income Tax Matters
The Company’s 2005 through 2008 income tax filings for the State of Georgia included state income tax credits for increased activity through Georgia ports. The Company has also filed similar claims for the years 2002 through 2004. The Georgia Department of Revenue has not responded to these claims. In July 2007, the Company filed a complaint in the Superior Court of Fulton County to recover the credits claimed for the years 2002 through 2004. An unrecognized tax benefit has been recorded related to these credits. See Note 5 under “Unrecognized Tax Benefits” for additional information. If the Company prevails, these claims could have a significant, and possibly material, positive effect on the Company’s net income. If the Company is not successful, payment of the related state tax could have a significant, and possibly material, negative effect on the Company’s cash flow. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined. See Note 5 under “Unrecognized Tax Benefits” for additional information.
Retail Regulatory Matters
Merger
Effective July 1, 2006, Savannah Electric, which was also a wholly owned subsidiary of Southern Company, was merged into the Company. The Company has accounted for the merger in a manner similar to a pooling of interests, and the Company’s financial statements included herein now reflect the merger as though it had occurred on January 1, 2006.
Rate Plans
In December 2007, the Georgia PSC approved the 2007 Retail Rate Plan for the years 2008 through 2010. Retail base rates increased by approximately $99.7 million effective January 1, 2008 to provide for cost recovery of transmission, distribution, generation, and other investment, as well as increased operating costs. In addition, the new ECCR tariff was implemented to recover costs incurred for environmental projects required by state and federal regulations. The ECCR tariff increased rates by approximately $222 million effective January 1, 2008. Under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, the Company’s earnings will continue to be evaluated against a retail return on equity (ROE) range of 10.25% to 12.25%. Two thirds of any earnings above 12.25% will be applied to rate refunds with the remaining one-third applied to the ECCR tariff. The Company agreed that it will not file for a general base rate increase during this period unless its projected retail ROE falls below 10.25%. There were no refunds related to earnings for the year 2008.
In December 2004, the Georgia PSC approved the 2004 Retail Rate Plan for the Company. Under the terms of the 2004 Retail Rate Plan, the Company’s earnings were evaluated against a retail ROE range of 10.25% to 12.25%. Two-thirds of any earnings above 12.25% were applied to rate refunds, with the remaining one-third retained by the Company. Retail rates and customer fees increased by approximately $203 million effective January 1, 2005 to cover the higher costs of purchased power, operating and maintenance expenses, environmental compliance, and continued investment in new generation, transmission, and distribution facilities to support growth and ensure reliability. In 2007, the Company refunded 2005 earnings above 12.25% retail ROE. There were no refunds related to earnings for the years 2006 and 2007.

II-222


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The Company is required to file a general rate case by July 1, 2010, in response to which the Georgia PSC would be expected to determine whether the 2007 Retail Rate Plan should be continued, modified, or discontinued.
Fuel Cost Recovery
The Company has established fuel cost recovery rates approved by the Georgia PSC. In June 2006, the Georgia PSC approved an increase in the Company’s total annual billings of approximately $400 million.
In February 2007, the Georgia PSC approved an increase in the Company’s total annual billings of approximately $383 million effective March 1, 2007. On May 20, 2008, the Georgia PSC approved an additional increase of approximately $222 million effective June 1, 2008. In compliance with the order, the Company is required to file a new fuel cost recovery rate by March 1, 2009. On February 19, 2009, the Georgia PSC approved the Company’s request to delay the filing of that case until March 13, 2009. The new rates are expected to become effective on June 1, 2009. As of December 31, 2008, the Company had a total under recovered fuel cost balance of approximately $764.4 million, of which approximately $223.9 million is not included in current rates.
Fuel cost recovery revenues as recorded on the financial statements are adjusted for differences in actual recoverable costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Accordingly, a change in the billing factor has no significant effect on the Company’s revenues or net income, but does impact annual cash flow. Approximately $425.6 million of the under recovered regulatory clause revenues for the Company is included in deferred charges and other assets at December 31, 2008.
Fuel Hedging Program
The Georgia PSC has approved a natural gas, oil procurement, and hedging program that allows the Company to use financial instruments to hedge price and commodity risk associated with these fuels, subject to certain limits in terms of time, volume, dollars, and physical amounts hedged. The costs of the program, including any net losses, are recovered as a fuel cost through the fuel cost recovery clause. Annual net financial gains from the hedging program, through June 30, 2006, were shared with the retail customers receiving 75% and the Company retaining 25% of the total net gains. Effective July 1, 2006, the profit sharing framework related to the fuel hedging program was terminated. The Company realized net losses in 2008, 2007, and 2006 of $1.9 million, $68 million, and $66 million, respectively.
Nuclear Construction
In August 2006, Southern Nuclear, on behalf of the Company, Oglethorpe Power Corporation (OPC), the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia (MEAG), and the City of Dalton, Georgia (Dalton) (collectively, Owners), filed an application with the NRC for an early site permit relating to two additional nuclear units on the site of Plant Vogtle. See Note 4 for additional information on these co-owners. On March 31, 2008, Southern Nuclear filed an application with the NRC for a COL for the new units.
On April 8, 2008, the Company, acting for itself and as agent for the Owners, and a consortium consisting of Westinghouse Electric Company LLC and Stone & Webster, Inc. (collectively, Consortium) entered into an engineering, procurement, and construction agreement to design, engineer, procure, construct, and test two AP1000 nuclear units with electric generating capacity of approximately 1,100 megawatts each and related facilities, structures, and improvements at Plant Vogtle (Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement).
The Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement is an arrangement whereby the Consortium supplies and constructs the entire facility with the exception of certain items provided by the Owners. Under the terms of the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement, the Owners will pay a purchase price that will be subject to certain price escalation and adjustments, adjustments for change orders, and performance bonuses. Each Owner is severally (and not jointly) liable for its proportionate share, based on its ownership interest, of all amounts owed to the Consortium under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement. The Company’s proportionate share, based on its current ownership interest, is 45.7%. Under the terms of a separate joint development agreement, the Owners finalized their ownership percentages on July 2, 2008, except for allowed changes, under certain limited circumstances, during the Georgia PSC certification process.
On August 1, 2008, the Company submitted an application for the Georgia PSC to certify the project. Hearings began November 3, 2008 and a final certification decision is expected in March 2009.

II-223


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
If certified by the Georgia PSC and licensed by the NRC, Vogtle Units 3 and 4 are scheduled to be placed in service in 2016 and 2017, respectively. The total plant value to be placed in service will also include financing costs for each of the Owners, the impacts of inflation on costs, and transmission and other costs that are the responsibility of the Owners. The Company’s proportionate share of the estimated in-service costs, based on its current ownership interest, is approximately $6.4 billion, subject to adjustments and performance bonuses under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement. In June 2006, the Georgia PSC approved the Company’s request to defer for future recovery early site permit and COL costs, of which the Company’s portion is estimated to total approximately $53 million. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, approximately $49.0 million and $28.4 million, respectively, were included in deferred charges and other assets. Such costs will be included in construction work in progress if the project is certified by the Georgia PSC.
The Owners and the Consortium have agreed to certain liquidated damages upon the Consortium’s failure to comply with the schedule and performance guarantees. The Owners and the Consortium also have agreed to certain bonuses payable to the Consortium for early completion and unit performance. The Consortium’s liability to the Owners for schedule and performance liquidated damages and warranty claims is subject to a cap.
The obligations of Westinghouse Electric Company LLC and Stone & Webster, Inc. under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement are guaranteed by Toshiba Corporation and The Shaw Group, Inc., respectively. In the event of certain credit rating downgrades of any Owner, such Owner will be required to provide a letter of credit or other credit enhancement.
The Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement is subject to certification by the Georgia PSC. In addition, the Owners may terminate the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement at any time for their convenience, provided that the Owners will be required to pay certain termination costs and, at certain stages of the work, cancellation fees to the Consortium. The Consortium may terminate the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement under certain circumstances, including delays in receipt of the COL or delivery of full notice to proceed, certain Owner suspension or delays of work, action by a governmental authority to permanently stop work, certain breaches of the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement by the Owners, Owner insolvency, and certain other events.  
Nuclear Fuel Disposal Costs
The Company has contracts with the United States, acting through the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), which provide for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel. The DOE failed to begin disposing of spent nuclear fuel in 1998 as required by the contracts, and the Company is pursuing legal remedies against the government for breach of contract.
In July 2007, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims awarded the Company approximately $30 million, based on its ownership interests, representing substantially all of the direct costs of the expansion of spent nuclear fuel storage facilities at Plants Hatch and Vogtle from 1998 through 2004. In JulyNovember 2007, the government filed agovernment’s motion for reconsideration which was denied in November 2007. Ondenied. In January 2, 2008, the government filed an appeal and, onin February 29, 2008, filed a motion to stay the appeal. OnIn April 1, 2008, the courtU.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted the government’s motion to stay the appeal pending the court’s decisions in three other similar cases already on appeal. Those cases were decided in August 2008. Based onThe U.S. Court of Appeals for the rulingsFederal Circuit has left the stay of appeals in those cases,place pending the decision in an appeal is expected to proceed in first quarter 2009.of another case involving spent nuclear fuel contracts.
OnIn April 3, 2008, a second claim against the government was filed for damages incurred after December 31, 2004 (the court-mandated cut-off in the original claim), due to the government’s alleged continuing breach of contract. OnIn October 31, 2008, the courtU.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a similar request by the government to stay this proceeding. The complaint does not contain

II-223


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
any specific dollar amount for recovery of damages. Damages will continue to accumulate until the issue is resolved or the storage is provided. No amounts have been recognized in the financial statements as of December 31, 20082009 for either claim. The final outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time, but no material impact on net income is expected as any damage amounts collected from the government are expected to be returned to customers.
Sufficient pool storage capacity for spent fuel is available at Plant Vogtle to maintain full-core discharge capability for both units into 2014. Expanded wet storage capacity and constructionConstruction of an on-site dry storage facility at Plant Vogtle is expected to begin in sufficient time to maintain pool full-core discharge capability. At Plant Hatch, an on-site dry storage facility is operational and can be expanded to accommodate spent fuel through the expected life of the plant.
Retail Regulatory Matters
Rate Plans
In December 2004, the Georgia PSC approved the Company’s retail rate plan for the years 2005 through 2007 (2004 Retail Rate Plan). Under the terms of the 2004 Retail Rate Plan, the Company’s earnings were evaluated against a retail return on equity (ROE) range of 10.25% to 12.25%. Two-thirds of any earnings above 12.25% were applied to rate refunds, with the remaining one-third retained by the Company. Retail rates and customer fees increased by approximately $203 million effective January 1, 2005 to cover the higher costs of purchased power, operating and maintenance expenses, environmental compliance, and continued investment in new generation, transmission, and distribution facilities to support growth and ensure reliability. In 2007, the Company refunded 2005 earnings above 12.25% retail ROE. There were no refunds related to earnings for 2007.
In December 2007, the Georgia PSC approved the 2007 Retail Rate Plan for the years 2008 through 2010. Under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, the Company’s earnings are evaluated against a retail ROE range of 10.25% to 12.25%. Retail base rates increased by approximately $100 million effective January 1, 2008 to provide for cost recovery of transmission, distribution, generation, and other investments, as well as increased operating costs. In addition, the ECCR tariff was implemented to allow for the recovery of costs related to environmental projects mandated by state and federal regulations. The ECCR tariff increased rates by approximately $222 million effective January 1, 2008.
In connection with the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, the Company agreed that it would not file for a general base rate increase during this period unless its projected retail ROE falls below 10.25%. The economic recession has significantly reduced the Company’s revenues upon which retail rates were set under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan. In June 2009, despite stringent efforts to reduce expenses, the Company’s projected retail ROE for both 2009 and 2010 was below 10.25%. However, in lieu of filing to increase customer rates as allowed under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, on June 29, 2009, the Company filed a request with the Georgia PSC for an accounting order that would allow the Company to amortize up to $324 million of its regulatory liability related to other cost of removal obligations.
On August 27, 2009, the Georgia PSC approved the accounting order. Under the terms of the accounting order, the Company was entitled to amortize up to one-third of the regulatory liability ($108 million) in 2009, limited to the amount needed to earn no more than a 9.75% retail ROE. For the year ended December 31, 2009, the Company amortized $41 million of the regulatory liability. In addition, the Company may amortize up to two-thirds of the regulatory liability ($216 million) in 2010, limited to the amount needed to earn no more than a 10.15% retail ROE.
The Company is required to file a general rate case by July 1, 2010, in response to which the Georgia PSC would be expected to determine whether the 2007 Retail Rate Plan should be continued, modified, or discontinued.
Fuel Cost Recovery
The Company has established fuel cost recovery rates approved by the Georgia PSC. In February 2007, the Georgia PSC approved an increase in the Company’s total annual billings of approximately $383 million effective March 1, 2007. On May 20, 2008, the Georgia PSC approved an additional increase of approximately $222 million effective June 1, 2008. The order in that case required the Company to file a new fuel cost recovery rate by March 1, 2009, which was subsequently approved by the Georgia PSC to be delayed until December 15, 2009. On December 15, 2009, the Company filed for a fuel cost recovery increase with the Georgia PSC. On February 22, 2010, the Company, the Georgia PSC Public Interest Advocacy Staff, and three customer groups entered into a stipulation to resolve the case, subject to approval by the Georgia PSC (the Stipulation). Under the terms of the Stipulation, the Company’s annual fuel cost recovery billings will increase by approximately $425 million. In addition, the Company will implement an interim fuel rider, which would allow the Company to adjust its fuel cost recovery rates prior to the next fuel case if the under recovered fuel balance exceeds budget by more than $75 million. The Company is required to file its next fuel case by March 1, 2011. The Georgia PSC is scheduled to vote on the Stipulation on March 11, 2010 with the new fuel rates to become effective April 1, 2010. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.

II-224


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
As of December 31, 2008, the Company had a total under recovered fuel cost balance of approximately $764.4 million. As of December 31, 2009, the Company’s under recovered fuel balance totaled approximately $665 million, which if the Stipulation is approved, the Company will recover over 32 months beginning April 1, 2010. Therefore, approximately $373 million of the under recovered regulatory clause revenues for the Company is included in deferred charges and other assets at December 31, 2009.
Fuel cost recovery revenues as recorded in the financial statements are adjusted for differences in actual recoverable costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Accordingly, a change in the billing factor has no significant effect on the Company’s revenues or net income, but does impact annual cash flow.
Construction
Nuclear
On August 26, 2009, the NRC issued an Early Site Permit and Limited Work Authorization to Southern Nuclear, on behalf of the Company, Oglethorpe Power Corporation (OPC), the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia (MEAG Power), and the City of Dalton, Georgia, an incorporated municipality in the State of Georgia acting by and through its Board of Water, Light, and Sinking Fund Commissioners (collectively, Owners), related to two additional nuclear units on the site of Plant Vogtle (Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4). See Note 4 for additional information on these co-owners. In March 2008, Southern Nuclear filed an application with the NRC for a combined construction and operating license (COL) for the new units. If licensed by the NRC, Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 are scheduled to be placed in service in 2016 and 2017, respectively.
In April 2008, the Company, acting for itself and as agent for the Owners, and a consortium consisting of Westinghouse Electric Company LLC (Westinghouse) and Stone & Webster, Inc. (collectively, Consortium) entered into an engineering, procurement, and construction agreement to design, engineer, procure, construct, and test two AP1000 nuclear units with electric generating capacity of approximately 1,100 megawatts each and related facilities, structures, and improvements at Plant Vogtle (Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement).
The Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement is an arrangement whereby the Consortium supplies and constructs the entire facility with the exception of certain items provided by the Owners. Under the terms of the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement, the Owners agreed to pay a purchase price that will be subject to certain price escalations and adjustments, including certain index-based adjustments, as well as adjustments for change orders, and performance bonuses for early completion and unit performance. Each Owner is severally (and not jointly) liable for its proportionate share, based on its ownership interest, of all amounts owed to the Consortium under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement. The Company’s proportionate share is 45.7%.
On February 23, 2010, the Company, acting for itself and as agent for the Owners, and the Consortium entered into an amendment to the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement. The amendment, which is subject to the approval of the Georgia PSC, replaces certain of the index-based adjustments to the purchase price with fixed escalation amounts.
The Owners and the Consortium have agreed to certain liquidated damages upon the Consortium’s failure to comply with the schedule and performance guarantees. The Consortium’s liability to the Owners for schedule and performance liquidated damages and warranty claims is subject to a cap.
Certain payment obligations of Westinghouse and Stone & Webster, Inc. under the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement are guaranteed by Toshiba Corporation and The Shaw Group, Inc., respectively. In the event of certain credit rating downgrades of any Owner, such Owner will be required to provide a letter of credit or other credit enhancement.
The Owners may terminate the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement at any time for their convenience, provided that the Owners will be required to pay certain termination costs and, at certain stages of the work, cancellation fees to the Consortium. The Consortium may terminate the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement under certain circumstances, including delays in receipt of the COL or delivery of full notice to proceed, certain Owner suspension or delays of work, action by a governmental authority to permanently stop work, certain breaches of the Vogtle 3 and 4 Agreement by the Owners, Owner insolvency, and certain other events.
On March 17, 2009, the Georgia PSC voted to certify construction of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 at an in-service cost of $6.4 billion. In addition, the Georgia PSC voted to approve the inclusion of the related construction work in progress accounts in rate base.

II-225


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
On April 21, 2009, the Governor of the State of Georgia signed into law the Georgia Nuclear Energy Financing Act that will allow the Company to recover financing costs for nuclear construction projects by including the related construction work in progress accounts in rate base during the construction period. The cost recovery provisions will become effective on January 1, 2011. With respect to Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4, this legislation allows the Company to recover projected financing costs of approximately $1.7 billion during the construction period beginning in 2011, which reduces the projected in-service cost to approximately $4.4 billion.
On June 15, 2009, an environmental group filed a petition in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia seeking review of the Georgia PSC’s certification order and challenging the constitutionality of the Georgia Nuclear Energy Financing Act. The Company believes there is no meritorious basis for this petition and intends to vigorously defend against the requested actions.
On August 27, 2009, the NRC issued letters to Westinghouse revising the review schedules needed to certify the AP1000 standard design for new reactors and expressing concerns related to the availability of adequate information and the shield building design. The shield building protects the containment and provides structural support to the containment cooling water supply. The Company is continuing to work with Westinghouse and the NRC to resolve these concerns. Any possible delays in the AP1000 design certification schedule, including those addressed by the NRC in their letters, are not currently expected to affect the projected commercial operation dates for Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4.
There are pending technical and procedural challenges to the construction and licensing of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4. Similar additional challenges at the state and federal level are expected as construction proceeds.
On August 31, 2009, the Company filed with the Georgia PSC its first semi-annual construction monitoring report for Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 for the period ended June 30, 2009 which did not include any proposed change to the estimated construction cost as certified by the Georgia PSC in March 2009. On February 25, 2010, the Georgia PSC approved the expenditures made by the Company pursuant to the certification through June 30, 2009. The Georgia PSC also ordered that in its future semi-annual construction monitoring reports, the Company will report against a total certified cost of approximately $6.1 billion, which is the effective certified amount after giving effect to the Georgia Nuclear Energy Financing Act as described above. The Company will continue to file construction monitoring reports by February 28 and August 31 of each year during the construction period.
The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Other Construction
On August 10, 2009, the Company filed its quarterly construction monitoring report for Plant McDonough Units 4, 5, and 6 for the quarter ended June 30, 2009. On September 30, 2009, the Company amended the report. As amended, the report includes a request for an increase in the certified costs to construct Plant McDonough. The Georgia PSC held a hearing in December 2009 and is scheduled to render its decision on March 16, 2010. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
4. JOINT OWNERSHIP AGREEMENTS
The Company and Alabama Power own equally all of the outstanding capital stock of SEGCO, which owns electric generating units with a total rated capacity of 1,020 megawatts, as well as associated transmission facilities. The capacity of thethese units has beenis sold equally to the Company and Alabama Power under a contract which, in substance, requires payments sufficient to provide for the operating expenses, taxes, debt service, and return on investment, whether or not SEGCO has any capacity and energy available. The term of the contract extends automatically for two-year periods, subject to either party’s right to cancel upon two year’s notice. The Company accounts for SEGCO using the equity method.
The Company’s share of expenses included in purchased power from affiliates in the statements of income is as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
  
Energy $86 $66 $58  $44 $86 $66 
Capacity 41 42 38  43 41 42 
Total $127 $108 $96  $87 $127 $108 

II-226


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The Company owns undivided interests in Plants Vogtle, Hatch, Scherer, and Wansley in varying amounts jointly with OPC, MEAG Power, Dalton, Florida Power & Light Company, Jacksonville Electric Authority, and Gulf Power. Under these agreements, the Company has contracted to operate and maintain the plants as agent for the co-owners and is jointly and severally liable for third party claims related to these plants. In addition, the Company jointly owns the Rocky Mountain pumped storage hydroelectric plant with OPC who is the operator of the plant. The Company and ProgressFlorida Power Corporation (Progress Energy Florida, Inc.Florida) jointly own a combustion turbine unit (Intercession City) operated by Progress Energy Florida, Inc.Florida.
At December 31, 20082009, the Company’s percentage ownership and investment (exclusive of nuclear fuel) in jointly owned facilities in commercial operation were as follows:
                        
 Company Accumulated Company Accumulated
Facility (Type) Ownership Investment Depreciation Ownership Investment Depreciation
 (in millions) (in millions)
Plant Vogtle (nuclear)  45.7% $3,303 $1,918  
Units 1 and 2  45.7% $3,285 $1,916 
Plant Hatch (nuclear) 50.1 953 521  50.1 937 522 
Plant Wansley (coal) 53.5 552 189  53.5 696 195 
Plant Scherer (coal)  
Units 1 and 2 8.4 117 68  8.4 133 70 
Unit 3 75.0 566 328  75.0 723 339 
Rocky Mountain (pumped storage) 25.4 175 102  25.4 175 106 
Intercession City (combustion-turbine) 33.3 12 3  33.3 12 3 
At December 31, 2008,2009, the portion of total construction work in progress related to Plants Wansley, Scherer, and Vogtle Units 3 and 4 was $5 million, $247 million, and $611 million, respectively. Construction at Plants Wansley and Scherer was $114 millionrelates primarily to environmental projects. See Note 3 under “Construction — Nuclear” for information on Plant Vogtle Units 3 and $247 million, respectively, primarily for environmental projects.4.
The Company’s proportionate share of its plant operating expenses is included in the corresponding operating expenses in the statements of income and the Company is responsible for providing its own financing.

II-225


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
5. INCOME TAXES
Southern Company files a consolidated federal income tax return and combined state income tax returns for the States of Alabama, Georgia, and Mississippi. Under a joint consolidated income tax allocation agreement, each subsidiary’s current and deferred tax expense is computed on a stand-alone basis and no subsidiary is allocated more expense than would be paid if it filed a separate income tax return. In accordance with IRS regulations, each company is jointly and severally liable for the tax liability.
Current and Deferred Income Taxes
The transfer of the Plant McIntosh construction project from Southern Power to the Company in 2005 resulted in a deferred gain to Southern Power for federal income tax purposes. The Company is reimbursing Southern Power for the remaining balance of the related deferred taxes of $4.6$3.9 million as it is reflected in Southern Power’s future taxable income. Of this amount, $3.8$3.5 million is included in Other Deferred Credits and $0.8$0.4 million is included in Affiliated Accounts Payable in the balance sheets at December 31, 2008.2009.
The transfer of the Dahlberg, Wansley, and Franklin projects to Southern Power from the Company in 2001 and 2002 also resulted in a deferred gain for federal income tax purposes. Southern Power is reimbursing the Company for the remaining balance of the related deferred taxes of $8.3$6.7 million as it is reflected in the Company’s future taxable income. Of this amount, $6.7$5.7 million is included in Other Deferred Debits and $1.6$1.0 million is included in Affiliated Accounts Receivable in the balance sheets at December 31, 2008.
Details of income tax provisions are as follows:
             
  2008 2007 2006
  (in millions)
             
Federal —            
Current $284  $442  $393 
Deferred  155   (72)  7 
 
   439   370   400 
 
State —            
Current  32   54   33 
Deferred  16   (6)  9 
 
   48   48   42 
 
Total $487  $418  $442 
 
2009.

II-226II-227


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Details of income tax provisions are as follows:
             
  2009 2008 2007
  (in millions)
             
Federal —            
Current $211  $284  $442 
Deferred  175   155   (72)
 
   386   439   370 
 
State —            
Current  7   32   54 
Deferred  17   16   (6)
 
   24   48   48 
 
Total $410  $487  $418 
 
The tax effects of temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and their respective tax bases, which give rise to deferred tax assets and liabilities, are as follows:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 (in millions) (in millions)
Deferred tax liabilities —  
Accelerated depreciation $2,554 $2,376  $2,923 $2,554 
Property basis differences 594 568  585 594 
Employee benefit obligations 174 374  184 174 
Fuel clause under recovery 311 281  270 311 
Premium on reacquired debt 67 71  64 67 
Emissions allowances 22  
Regulatory assets associated with employee benefit obligations 349 123  362 349 
Asset retirement obligations 267 257  263 267 
Other 72 53  70 72 
Total 4,388 4,103  4,743 4,388 
Deferred tax assets —  
Federal effect of state deferred taxes 189 160  177 189 
Employee benefit obligations 457 226  482 457 
Other property basis differences 127 130  117 127 
Other deferred costs 99 131  65 99 
Cost of removal obligations 109  
State tax credit carry forward 99  
Other comprehensive income 10 2  12 10 
Regulatory liabilities associated with employee benefit obligations  209 
Unbilled fuel revenue 42 34  42 42 
Asset retirement obligations 267 257  263 267 
Environmental capital cost recovery 52   37 52 
Other 21 35  38 21 
Total 1,264 1,184  1,441 1,264 
Total deferred tax liabilities, net 3,124 2,919  3,302 3,124 
Portion included in current liabilities, net  (60)  (69)
Portion included in current assets/(liabilities), net 88  (60)
Accumulated deferred income taxes $3,064 $2,850  $3,390 $3,064 

II-228


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
At December 31, 2008,2009, tax-related regulatory assets were $573$609 million and tax-related regulatory liabilities were $141$134 million. The assets are attributable to tax benefits flowed through to customers in prior years and to taxes applicable to capitalized interest. The liabilities are attributable to deferred taxes previously recognized at rates higher than current enacted tax law and to unamortized investment tax credits. In accordance with regulatory requirements, deferred investment tax credits are amortized over the life of the related property with such amortization normally applied as a credit to reduce depreciation in the statements of income. Credits amortized in this manner amounted to $13.7 million in 2009 and $13.0 million annually in 2008 2007, and 2006.2007. At December 31, 2008,2009, all investment tax credits available to reduce federal income taxes payable had been utilized.

II-227


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Effective Tax Rate
A reconciliation of the federal statutory income tax rate to the effective income tax rate wasis as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
Federal statutory rate  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%
State income tax, net of federal deduction 2.2 2.4 2.2  1.2 2.2 2.4 
Non-deductible book depreciation 0.9 1.1 1.1  1.1 0.9 1.1 
AFUDC equity  (2.4)  (1.9)  (0.9)  (2.7)  (2.4)  (1.9)
Donations   (1.7)    (0.8)   (1.7)
Other  (1.1)  (1.7)  (1.6)  (0.8)  (1.1)  (1.7)
Effective income tax rate  34.6%  33.2%  35.8%  33.0%  34.6%  33.2%
The decrease in the Company’s 2009 effective tax rate is primarily the result of the Company’s donation of 5,111 acres of land to the State of Georgia combined with an increase in non-taxable AFUDC equity and a decrease in tax deductions related to unrecognized tax benefits. See “Unrecognized Tax Benefits” and Note 3 under “Income Tax Matters” for additional information on these unrecognized tax benefits and related litigation.
The increase in 2008’sthe Company’s 2008 effective tax rate is primarily the result of a decrease in donations for 2008 as a result of the significant Tallulah Gorge land donation in 2007 combined with an increase in non-taxable AFUDC equity.
In 2007, the Company donated 2,200 acres of land in the Tallulah Gorge State Park to the State of Georgia. The estimated value of this donation along with an increase in non-taxable AFUDC equity and available state tax credits as well as higher federal tax deductions caused a lower effective income tax rate for the year ended 2007, when compared to prior years. For additional information regarding litigation related to state tax credits, see Note 3 under “Income Tax Matters.”
The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 created a tax deduction for a portion of income attributable to U.S. production activities as defined in the Internal Revenue Code Section 199 (production activities deduction). The deduction is equal to a stated percentage of qualified production activities net income. The percentage is phased in over the years 2005 through 2010 with a 3% rate applicable to the years 2005 and 2006, a 6% rate applicable for the years 2007 through 2009, and a 9% rate thereafter. This increase from 3% in 2006 to 6% in 2007 was one of several factors that increased the Company’s 2007 deduction by $18.6 million over the 2006 deduction. The resulting additional tax benefit was $6.5 million. The IRS has not clearly defined a methodology for calculating this deduction. However, theSouthern Company has agreedreached an agreement with the IRS on a calculation methodology and signed a closing agreement onin December 11, 2008. Therefore, in 2008, the Company reversed the unrecognized tax benefit related to the calculation methodology and adjusted the deduction for all previous years to conform to the agreement which resulted in a decrease in the 2008 deduction when compared to the 2007 deduction. Certain aspects of the production activities deduction remain unresolved. The net impact of the reversal of the unrecognized tax benefits combined with the application of the new methodology had no material effect on the Company’s financial statements.
Unrecognized Tax Benefits
FASB Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes” requires companies to determine whether it is “more likely than not” that a tax position will be sustained upon examination by the appropriate taxing authorities before any part of the benefit can be recorded in the financial statements. It also provides guidance on the recognition, measurement, and classification of income tax uncertainties, along with any related interest and penalties. For 2008,2009, the total amount of unrecognized tax benefits increased by $47.9$44.3 million, resulting in a balance of $137.1$181.4 million as of December 31, 2008.2009.
Changes during the year in unrecognized tax benefits were as follows:
                    
 2008 2007 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
Unrecognized tax benefits at beginning of year $89.2 $65.0  $137 $89 $65 
Tax positions from current periods 47.0 20.5  44 47 20 
Tax positions from prior periods 4.6 3.7  1 5 4 
Reductions due to settlements  (3.7)     (4)   
Reductions due to expired statute of limitations  (1)   
Balance at end of year $137.1 $89.2  $181 $137 $89 

II-228II-229


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
The tax positions from current periods increase for 2009 relate primarily to the Georgia state tax credits litigation, the production activities deduction tax position, and other miscellaneous uncertain tax positions. The reductions duetax positions increase from prior periods for 2009 relates primarily to settlements relate to the agreement with the IRS regarding the production activities deduction methodology.tax position. See Note 3 under “Income Tax Matters” and “Effective Tax Rate” above for additional information.
Impact on the Company’s effective tax rate, if recognized, is as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 Change 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions) 
Tax positions impacting the effective tax rate $134.2 $86.1 $48.1  $181 $134 $86 
Tax positions not impacting the effective tax rate 2.9 3.1  (0.2)  3  3
Balance of unrecognized tax benefits $137.1 $89.2 $47.9  $181 $137 $89 
The tax positions impacting the effective tax rate increase of $48.1 million primarily relate to Georgia state tax credit litigation at the Company. See Note 3 under “Income Tax Matters” for additional information.
Accrued interest for unrecognized tax benefits:benefits was as follows:
                    
 2008 2007 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions) 
Interest accrued at beginning of year $7.1 $2.7  $14 $7 $3 
Interest reclassified due to settlements  (0.3)      
Interest accrued during the year 6.8 4.4  6 7 4 
Balance at end of year $13.6 $7.1  $20 $14 $7 
The Company classifies interest on tax uncertainties as interest expense. Net interest accrued for the year ended December 31, 2008 was $6.5 million. The Company did not accrue any penalties on uncertain tax positions.
The IRS has audited and closed all tax returns prior to 2004. The audits for the state returns have either been concluded, or the statute of limitations has expired, for years prior to 2002.2006.
Substantially all of the Company’s unrecognized tax benefits impacting the effective tax rate are associated with the state income tax credits discussed in Note 3 under “Income Tax Matters.” Settlement of this litigation could occur within the next 12 months, which would reduce the balance of the uncertain tax position by these amounts.
6. FINANCING
Long-Term Debt Payable to Affiliated Trusts
The Company has formed certain wholly ownedwholly-owned trust subsidiaries for the purpose of issuing preferred securities. The proceeds of the related equity investments and preferred security sales were loaned back to the Company through the issuance of junior subordinated notes totaling $206 million, which constitute substantially all of the assets of these trusts and are reflected in the balance sheets as “Long-termLong-term Debt. The Company considers that the mechanisms and obligations relating to the preferred securities issued for its benefit, taken together, constitute a full and unconditional guarantee by it of the respective trusts’ payment obligations with respect to these securities. At December 31, 2008,2009, preferred securities of $200 million were outstanding. See Note 1 under “Variable Interest Entities” for additional information on the accounting treatment for these trusts and the related securities.

II-229


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Securities Due Within One Year
A summary of the scheduled maturities and redemptions of securities due within one year at December 31 is as follows:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 (in millions) (in millions)
Capital lease $5 $4  $4 $5 
Senior notes 275 195  250 275 
Total $280 $199  $254 $280 
Redemptions and/or maturitiesMaturities through 20132014 applicable to total long-term debt are as follows: $280 million in 2009; $254 million in 2010; $414$415 million in 2011; $205 million in 2012; and $530 million in 2013.2013; and $5 million in 2014.

II-230


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Pollution Control Revenue Bonds
Pollution control obligations represent loans to the Company from public authorities of funds derived from sales by such authorities of revenue bonds issued to finance pollution control facilities. The Company is required to make payments sufficient for the authorities to meet principal and interest requirements of such bonds. The Company has incurred obligations in connection with the sale by public authorities of tax-exempt pollution control revenue bonds. The amount of tax-exempt pollution control revenue bonds outstanding at December 31, 2009 and 2008 was $2.0 billion and $1.9 billion.billion, respectively. Proceeds from certain issuances are restricted until thequalifying expenditures are incurred.
Senior Notes
The Company issued $1.0 billion aggregate principal amount of unsecured senior notes in 2008.2009. The proceeds of the issuance were used to repay a portion of the Company’s short termshort-term indebtedness, fund note maturities,redemptions totaling $333 million, redeem pollution control revenue bonds totaling $327.3 million, and fund the Company’s continuous construction program. At December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, the Company had $4.8$5.4 billion and $4.0$4.8 billion of senior notes outstanding, respectively. These senior notes are effectively subordinated to all secured debt of the Company, which aggregated $63 million and $68 million at December 31, 2008. Subsequent to December 31,2009 and 2008, the Company issued $500 million of Series 2009A 5.95% Senior Notes due February 2039. The proceeds from the sale of the Series 2009A Senior Notes were used by the Company to repay at maturity $150 million aggregate principal amount of the Company’s Series U Floating Rate Senior Notes, to repay a portion of its outstanding short-term indebtedness, and for general corporate purposes.respectively.
Bank Term Loans
DuringAt December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company borrowedhad a $300 million under a three-year termbank loan agreement and $100 million under a short-term loan agreement. The proceeds of these issuances were used for general corporate purposes, including the Company’s continuous construction program.outstanding, which matures in March 2011.
Capital Leases
Assets acquired under capital leases are recorded in the balance sheets as utility plant in service, and the related obligations are classified as long-term debt. At December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, the Company had a capitalized lease obligation for its corporate headquarters building of $66$62 million and $69$66 million, respectively, with an interest rate of 8.0%. For ratemaking purposes, the Georgia PSC has treated the lease as an operating lease and has allowed only the lease payments in cost of service. The difference between the accrued expense and the lease payments allowed for ratemaking purposes has been deferred and is being amortized to expense as ordered by the Georgia PSC. See Note 1 under “Regulatory Assets and Liabilities.”
At December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, the Company had capitalized lease obligations of $0.8$0.6 million and $1.9$0.8 million, respectively, for its vehicles. However, for ratemaking purposes, these obligations are treated as operating leases and, as such, lease payments are charged to expense as incurred. The annual expense incurred for theseall capital leases in 2009, 2008, and 2007 and 2006 was $8.7 million, $9.7 million, $9.2 million, and $9.6$9.2 million, respectively.
Outstanding Classes of Capital Stock
The Company currently has preferred stock, Class A preferred stock, preference stock, and common stock authorized. The Company has shares of its Class A preferred stock, preference stock, and common stock outstanding. The Company’s Class A preferred stock ranks senior to the Company’s preference stock and common stock with respect to payment of dividends and voluntary or involuntary

II-230


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
dissolution. The Company’s preference stock ranks senior to the common stock with respect to the payment of dividends and voluntary or involuntary dissolution. Certain series of the Class A preferred stock and preference stock are subject to redemption at the option of the Company on or after a specified date (typically 5five or 10 years after the date of issuance) at a redemption price equal to 100% of the liquidation amount of the stock. In addition, the Company may redeem the outstanding series of the preference stock at a redemption price equal to 100% of the liquidation amount plus a make-whole premium based on the present value of the liquidation amount and future dividends.
Dividend Restrictions
The Company can only pay dividends to Southern Company out of retained earnings or paid-in-capital.
Bank Credit Arrangements
At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had credit arrangements with banks totaling $1.3$1.7 billion, of which $12 million was used to support outstanding letters of credit. Of these facilities, $225$595 million expire during 2009,2010, with the remaining $1.1 billion expiring in

II-231


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
2012. $40 million of the facilities that expire in 20092010 provides the option of converting borrowings into a two-year term loan. The Company expects to renew its facilities, as needed, prior to expiration. The agreements contain stated borrowing rates. All the agreements require payment of commitment fees based on the unused portion of the commitments or the maintenance of compensating balances with the banks. Commitment fees average less than 1/3/8 of 1% for the Company. Compensating balances are not legally restricted from withdrawal.
The credit arrangements contain covenants that limit the ratio of indebtedness to capitalization (each as defined in the arrangements) to 65%. For purposes of these definitions, indebtedness excludes the long-term debt payable to affiliated trusts and, in certain cases, other hybrid securities. In addition, the credit arrangements contain cross default provisions that would trigger an event of default if the Company defaulted on other indebtedness above a specified threshold. At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company was in compliance with all such covenants. None of the arrangements contain material adverse change clauses at the time of borrowings.
The $1.3$1.7 billion of unused credit arrangements provides liquidity support to the Company’s variable rate pollution control revenue bonds and its commercial paper borrowings. The amount of variable rate pollution control revenue bonds outstanding requiring liquidity support as of December 31, 20082009 was $636$901 million. In addition, the Company borrows under a commercial paper program. The amount of commercial paper outstanding at December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007 and 2006 was $324 million, $256 million, $616 million, and $733$616 million, respectively. The Company also had $100 million of short-term bank loans outstanding at December 31, 2008. Commercial paper and short-term bank loans are included in notes payable on the balance sheets.
During 2008,2009, the peak amount of short-term debt outstanding was $908$757 million and the average amount outstanding was $460$348 million. The average annual interest rate on short-term debt in 2009 and 2008 was 2.9%.
Financial Instruments
The Company enters into energy-related derivatives to hedge exposures to electricity, gas,0.4% and other fuel price changes. However, due to cost-based rate regulations, the Company has limited exposure to market volatility in commodity fuel prices and prices of electricity. The Company manages a fuel-hedging program as discussed in Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters – Fuel Hedging Program.” The Company also enters into hedges of forward electricity sales. At December 31, 2008, the Company had a net $113 million fair value liability of energy-related derivative contracts designated as regulatory hedges in the financial statements. The gains and losses arising from these regulatory hedges are initially recorded as regulatory liabilities and assets, respectively, and then are included in fuel expense as they are recovered through the fuel cost recovery mechanism. There was no material ineffectiveness related to energy related derivatives recorded in earnings for any period presented. The Company has energy-related hedges in place up to and including 2012.
The Company also enters into derivatives to hedge exposure to changes in interest rates. Derivatives related to existing variable rate securities or forecasted transactions are accounted for as cash flow hedges. The derivatives employed as hedging instruments are structured to minimize ineffectiveness. As such, no material ineffectiveness has been recorded in earnings for any period presented.

II-231


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
At December 31, 2008, the Company had $851 million notional amounts of interest derivatives accounted for as cash flow hedges outstanding with net fair value gains/(losses) as follows:
               
            Fair Value
Notional    Variable Rate Weighted Average Hedge Maturity Gain (Loss)
Amount        Received Fixed Rate Paid Date December 31, 2008
(in millions)         (in millions)
Cash Flow Hedges on Existing Debt          
$301  SIFMA Index *  2.22% December 2009 $(3)
 150  3-month LIBOR  2.63% February 2009   
 300  1-month LIBOR  2.43% April 2010  (5)
Cash Flow Hedges on Forecasted Debt          
 100  3-month LIBOR  4.98% February 2019  (21)
 
*Hedged using the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association Municipal Swap Index (SIFMA) (formerly the Bond Market Association/PSA Municipal Swap Index)
The fair value gains or losses for cash flow hedges are recorded in other comprehensive income and are reclassified into earnings at the same time the hedged items affect earnings. In 2008, 2007, and 2006, the Company settled gains/(losses) totaling approximately $(20) million, $12 million, and $(4) million, respectively, upon termination of certain interest derivatives at the same time it issued debt. The effective portion of these gains/(losses) have been deferred in other comprehensive income and will be amortized to interest expense over the life of the original interest derivative. In 2008, the Company also settled an interest derivative early because of counterparty credit issues at a loss of approximately $(2) million. This loss is deferred in other comprehensive income and will be amortized into earnings once the forecasted debt is issued in 2009. Amounts reclassified from other comprehensive income to interest expense were immaterial for all periods presented. For 2009, pre-tax losses of approximately $(14) million are expected to be reclassified from other comprehensive income to interest expense. The Company has interest-related hedges in place through 2019 and has deferred realized gains/(losses) that are being amortized through 2037.
Subsequent to December 31, 2008, the Company settled $100 million of hedges related to the forecasted debt issuance in February 2009 at a loss of approximately $16 million. This loss will be amortized into earnings over 10 years.
All derivative financials instruments are recognized as either assets or liabilities and are measured at fair value. See Note 10 for additional information.2.9%, respectively.
7. COMMITMENTS
Construction Program
The Company currently estimates property additions to be approximately $2.5 billion, $2.4 billion, and $2.8 billion $2.6 billion,in 2010, 2011, and $2.6 billion in 2009, 2010, and 2011,2012, respectively. This estimate assumes the Company’s current request to include construction work in progress for Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 in rates is granted by regulators, beginning in 2011. If not, the estimate will increase by approximately $144 million in 2011. These amounts include $139$198 million, $114$109 million, and $105$115 million in 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2011,2012, respectively, for construction expenditures related to contractual purchase commitments for nuclear fuel included under “Fuel Commitments.” The construction programs are subject to periodic review and revision, and actual construction costs may vary from these estimates because of numerous factors. These factors include: changes in business conditions; revised load growth estimates; changes in environmental statutes and regulations; changes in nuclear plants to meet new regulatory requirements; changes in FERC rules and regulations; Georgia PSC approvals; changes in legislation; the cost and efficiency of construction labor, equipment, and materials; project scope and design changes; and the cost of capital. In addition, there can be no assurance that costs related to capital expenditures will be fully recovered. At December 31, 2008,2009, significant purchase commitments were outstanding in connection with the construction program. See Note 3 under “Construction” for additional information.
Long-Term Service Agreements
The Company has entered into a Long-Term Service Agreement (LTSA) with General Electric (GE) for the purpose of securing maintenance support for the combustion turbines at the Plant McIntosh combined cycle facility. In summary, the LTSA stipulates that

II-232


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
GE will perform all planned inspections on the covered equipment, which includes the cost of all labor and materials. GE is also obligated to cover the costs of unplanned maintenance on the covered equipment subject to a limit specified in the contract.
In general, this LTSA is in effect through two major inspection cycles per unit. Scheduled payments to GE, which are subject to price escalation, are made quarterly based on actual operating hours of the respective units. Total payments to GE under this agreement are currently estimated at $183$171.5 million over the remaining term of the agreement, which is currently projected to be approximately 10nine years. However, the LTSA contains various cancellation provisions at the option of the Company.
The Company has also entered into an LTSA with GE through 2014 for neutron monitoring system parts and electronics at Plant Hatch. Total remaining payments to GE under this agreement are currently estimated at $9.8$8 million. The contract contains cancellation provisions at the option of the Company. Payments made to GE prior to the performance of any work are recorded as a prepayment in the balance sheets. Work performed by GE is capitalized or charged to expense, as appropriate, net of any joint owner billings, based on the nature of the work.

II-232


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The Company has entered into a LTSA with Mitsubishi Power Systems Americas, Inc. (MPS) for the purpose of providing certain parts and maintenance services for the three combined cycle units under construction at Plant McDonough, which are scheduled to go into service in February 2011, June 2011, and June 2012, respectively. The LTSA stipulates that MPS will perform all planned maintenance on each covered unit which includes the cost of all materials and services. MPS is also obligated to cover costs of unplanned maintenance on the gas turbines subject to limits specified in the LTSA. This LTSA will begin in 2011 and is in effect through two major inspection cycles per covered unit. Periodic payments to MPS are to be made quarterly and will also be made based on the scheduled inspections for the respective covered units. Payments to MPS under this agreement, which are subject to price escalation, are currently estimated to be $536.8 million for the term of the agreement which is expected to be between 12 and 13 years. However, the LTSA contains various termination provisions at the option of the Company.
Limestone Commitments
As part of the Company’s program to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions from its coal plants, the Company has begun construction of flue gas desulfurization projects and has entered into various long-term commitments for the procurement of limestone to be used in suchflue gas desulfurization equipment. Limestone contracts are structured with tonnage minimums and maximums in order to account for fluctuations in coal burn and sulfur content. The Company has a minimum contractual obligation of 3.63.3 million tons, equating to approximately $111.7$101.0 million through 2019. Estimated expenditures (based on minimum contracted obligated dollars) over the next five years are $10.3 million in 2009, $19.3 million in 2010, $14.9$14.8 million in 2011, $15.3$15.2 million in 2012, and $15.7$15.5 million in 2013.2013, and $16.0 million in 2014.
Fuel Commitments
To supply a portion of the fuel requirements of its generating plants, the Company has entered into various long-term commitments for the procurement of fossil and nuclear fuel. In most cases, these contracts contain provisions for price escalations, minimum purchase levels, and other financial commitments. Coal commitments include forward contract purchases for sulfur dioxide emissionemissions allowances. Natural gas purchase commitments contain fixed volumes with prices based on various indices at the time of delivery; amounts included in the chart below represent estimates based on New York Mercantile Exchange future prices at December 31, 2008.2009.
Total estimated minimum long-term obligationscommitments at December 31, 20082009 were as follows:
                        
 Commitments Commitments
 Natural Gas Coal Nuclear Fuel Natural Gas Coal Nuclear Fuel
 (in millions) (in millions) 
2009 $657 $2,497 $139 
2010 349 2,001 114  $473 $2,239 $198 
2011 282 1,712 105  575 1,843 109 
2012 364 671 108  453 766 115 
2013 380 735 91  422 525 111 
2014 and thereafter 2,917 1,999 33 
2014 350 434 60 
2015 and thereafter 3,414 1,533 207 
Total $4,949 $9,615 $590  $5,687 $7,340 $800 
Additional commitments for fuel will be required to supply the Company’s future needs. Total charges for nuclear fuel included in fuel expense were $82 million, $77 million, $79 million, and $71$79 million for the years 2009, 2008, and 2007, and 2006, respectively.

II-233


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
SCS may enter into various types of wholesale energy and natural gas contracts acting as an agent for the Company and all of the other Southern Company traditional operating companies and Southern Power. Under these agreements, each of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power may be jointly and severally liable. The creditworthiness of Southern Power is currently inferior to the creditworthiness of the traditional operating companies. Accordingly, Southern Company has entered into keep-well agreements with the Company and each of the other traditional operating companies to ensure theythe Company will not subsidize or be responsible for any costs, losses, liabilities, or damages resulting from the inclusion of Southern Power as a contracting party under these agreements.
Purchased Power Commitments
The Company has commitments regarding a portion of a 5% interest in Plant Vogtle owned by MEAG Power that are in effect until the latter of the retirement of the plant or the latest stated maturity date of MEAG’sMEAG Power’s bonds issued to finance such ownership interest. The payments for capacity are required whether or not any capacity is available. The energy cost is a function of each unit’s

II-233


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
variable operating costs. Portions of the capacity payments relate to costs in excess of Plant Vogtle’s allowed investment for ratemaking purposes. The present value of these portions at the time of the disallowance was written off. Generally, the cost of such capacity and energy is included in purchased power from non-affiliates in the statements of income. Capacity payments totaled $47 million, $48 million, and $46 million in 2009, 2008, and $49 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. The Company also has entered into other various long-term PPAs. Estimated total long-term obligations under these commitments at December 31, 20082009 were as follows:
                        
 Vogtle Affiliated Non-Affiliated Vogtle Affiliated Non-Affiliated
 Capacity Payments PPA PPA Capacity Payments PPAs PPAs
 (in millions) (in millions)
2009 $55 $220 $95 
2010 54 153 136  $55 $153 $135 
2011 51 119 143  53 119 142 
2012 46 107 116  47 107 115 
2013 21 107 109  22 107 108 
2014 and thereafter 114 596 1,476 
2014 18 108 109 
2015 and thereafter 86 488 1,365 
Total $341 $1,302 $2,075  $281 $1,082 $1,974 
Certain PPAs reflected in the table are accounted for as operating leases.
Operating Leases
The Company has entered into various operating leases with various terms and expiration dates. Rental expenses related to these operating leases totaled $43 million for 2009, $52 million for 2008, and $55 million for 2007, and $53 million for 2006.2007.
At December 31, 2008,2009, estimated minimum lease payments for these noncancelable operating leases were as follows:
                        
 Minimum Lease Payments Minimum Lease Payments
 Rail Cars Other Total Rail Cars Other Total
 (in millions) (in millions)
2009 $33 $10 $43 
2010 27 7 34  $30 $7 $37 
2011 25 6 31  30 5 35 
2012 14 3 17  16 3 19 
2013 12 3 15  12 3 15 
2014 and thereafter 25 3 28 
2014 10 3 13 
2015 and thereafter 15 2 17 
Total $136 $32 $168  $113 $23 $136 
In addition to the rental commitments above, the Company has obligations upon expiration of certain rail car leases with respect to the residual value of the leased property. These leases expire in 2011 and the Company’s maximum obligation is $39.8$39.7 million. At the termination of the leases, at the Company’s option, the Company may either exercise its purchase option or the property can be sold to

II-234


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
a third party. The Company expects that the fair market value of the leased property would substantially reduce or eliminate the Company’s payments under the residual value obligation. A portion of the rail car lease obligations is shared with the joint owners of Plants Scherer and Wansley. A majority of the rental expenses related to the rail car leases are fully recoverable through the fuel cost recovery clause as ordered by the Georgia PSC and the remaining portion is recovered through base rates.
Guarantees
Alabama Power has guaranteed unconditionally the obligation of SEGCO under an installment sale agreement for the purchase of certain pollution control facilities at SEGCO’s generating units, pursuant to which $24.5 million principal amount of pollution control revenue bonds are outstanding. Alabama Power has also guaranteed $50 million in senior notes issued by SEGCO. The Company has agreed to reimburse Alabama Power for the pro rata portion of such obligations corresponding to the Company’s then proportionate ownership of stock of SEGCO if Alabama Power is called upon to make such payment under its guaranty.
As discussed earlier in this Note under “Operating Leases,” the Company has entered into certain residual value guarantees related to rail car leases.

II-234


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
8. STOCK OPTION PLAN
Southern Company provides non-qualified stock options to a large segment of the Company’s employees ranging from line management to executives. As of December 31, 2008,2009, there were 1,7441,954 current and former employees of the Company participating in the stock option plan, and there were 33.221 million shares of Southern Company common stock remaining available for awards under this plan. The prices of options granted to date have been at the fair market value of the shares on the dates of grant. Options granted to date become exercisable pro rata over a maximum period of three years from the date of grant. The Company generally recognizes stock option expense on a straight-line basis over the vesting period which equates to the requisite service period; however, for employees who are eligible for retirement the total cost is expensed at the grant date. Options outstanding will expire no later than 10 years after the date of grant, unless terminated earlier by the Southern Company Board of Directors in accordance with the stock option plan. For certain stock option awards, a change in control will provide accelerated vesting.
The estimated fair values of stock options granted in 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007 were derived using the Black-Scholes stock option pricing model. Expected volatility was based on historical volatility of Southern Company’s stock over a period equal to the expected term. The Company used historical exercise data to estimate the expected term that represents the period of time that options granted to employees are expected to be outstanding. The risk-free rate was based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant that covers the expected term of the stock options. The following table shows the assumptions used in the pricing model and the weighted average grant-date fair value of stock options granted:
                        
Year Ended December 31 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007 
Expected volatility  13.1%  14.8%  16.9%  15.6%  13.1%  14.8%
Expected term(in years)
 5.0 5.0 5.0  5.0 5.0 5.0 
Interest rate  2.8%  4.6%  4.6%  1.9%  2.8%  4.6%
Dividend yield  4.5%  4.3%  4.4%  5.4%  4.5%  4.3%
Weighted average grant-date fair value $2.37 $4.12 $4.15  $1.80 $2.37 $4.12 
The Company’s activity in the stock option plan for 20082009 is summarized below:
         
  Shares Subject to Weighted Average
  Option Exercise Price
 
Outstanding at December 31, 2007  7,538,109  $30.59 
Granted  1,430,140   35.78 
Exercised  (961,426)  27.34 
Cancelled  (14,387)  34.82 
 
Outstanding at December 31, 2008
  7,992,436  $31.90 
 
Exercisable at December 31, 2008
  5,308,585  $29.98 
 

II-235


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
         
  Shares Subject to Weighted Average
  Option Exercise Price
 
Outstanding at December 31, 2008  7,992,436  $31.90 
Granted  2,489,671   31.38 
Exercised  (121,447)  20.59 
Cancelled  (37,736)  32.71 
 
Outstanding at December 31, 2009
  10,322,924  $31.90 
 
Exercisable at December 31, 2009
  6,870,135  $31.35 
 
The number of stock options vested, and expected to vest in the future, as of December 31, 20082009 was not significantly different from the number of stock options outstanding at December 31, 20082009 as stated above. At December 31, 2008,2009, the weighted average remaining contractual term for the options outstanding and options exercisable was 6.25.9 years and 5.04.6 years, respectively, and the aggregate intrinsic value for the options outstanding and options exercisable was $40.8$23.1 million and $37.3$18.7 million, respectively.
As of December 31, 2008,2009, there was $1.5$1.4 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to stock option awards not yet vested. That cost is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 10 months.
For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006,2007, total compensation cost for stock option awards recognized in income was $4.6 million, $4.2 million, $6.0 million, and $5.8$6.0 million, respectively, with the related tax benefit also recognized in income of $1.8 million, $1.6 million, and $2.3 million, and $2.0 million, respectively.

II-235


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The compensation cost and tax benefits related to the grant and exercise of Southern Company stock options to the Company’s employees are recognized in the Company’s financial statements with a corresponding credit to equity, representing a capital contribution from Southern Company.
The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007 and 2006 was $1.7 million, $10.6 million, $17.4 million, and $10.3$17.4 million, respectively. The actual tax benefit realized by the Company for the tax deductions from stock option exercises totaled $0.7 million, $4.1 million, $6.7 million, and $4.0$6.7 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006.2007.
9. NUCLEAR INSURANCE
Under the Price-Anderson Amendments Act (Act), the Company maintains agreements of indemnity with the NRC that, together with private insurance, cover third-party liability arising from any nuclear incident occurring at the Company’s Plants Hatch and Vogtle. The Act provides funds up to $12.5$12.6 billion for public liability claims that could arise from a single nuclear incident. Each nuclear plant is insured against this liability to a maximum of $300$375 million by American Nuclear Insurers (ANI), with the remaining coverage provided by a mandatory program of deferred premiums that could be assessed, after a nuclear incident, against all owners of commercial nuclear reactors. The Company could be assessed up to $117.5 million per incident for each licensed reactor it operates but not more than an aggregate of $17.5 million per incident to be paid in a calendar year for each reactor. Such maximum assessment, excluding any applicable state premium taxes, for the Company, based on its ownership and buyback interests, is $237 million, per incident, but not more than an aggregate of $35 million to be paid for each incident in any one year. Both the maximum assessment per reactor and the maximum yearly assessment are adjusted for inflation at least every five years. The next scheduled adjustment is due no later than October 29, 2013.
The Company is a member of Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL), a mutual insurer established to provide property damage insurance in an amount up to $500 million for members’ nuclear generating facilities.
Additionally, the Company has policies that currently provide decontamination, excess property insurance, and premature decommissioning coverage up to $2.25 billion for losses in excess of the $500 million primary coverage. This excess insurance is also provided by NEIL. In the event of a loss, the amount of insurance available may not be adequate to cover property damage and other incurred expenses.
NEIL also covers the additional costs that would be incurred in obtaining replacement power during a prolonged accidental outage at a member’s nuclear plant. Members can purchase this coverage, subject to a deductible waiting period of up to 26 weeks, with a maximum per occurrence per unit limit of $490 million. After the deductible period, weekly indemnity payments would be received until either the unit is operational or until the limit is exhausted in approximately three years. The Company purchases the maximum limit allowed by NEIL, subject to ownership limitations. Each facility has elected a 12-week deductible waiting period.
Under each of the NEIL policies, members are subject to assessments if losses each year exceed the accumulated funds available to the insurer under that policy. The current maximum annual assessments for the Company under the NEIL policies would be $51$50 million.
Claims resulting from terrorist acts are covered under both the ANI and NEIL policies (subject to normal policy limits). The aggregate, however, that NEIL will pay for all claims resulting from terrorist acts in any 12-month period is $3.2 billion plus such additional amounts NEIL can recover through reinsurance, indemnity, or other sources.

II-236


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
For all on-site property damage insurance policies for commercial nuclear power plants, the NRC requires that the proceeds of such policies shall be dedicated first for the sole purpose of placing the reactor in a safe and stable condition after an accident. Any remaining proceeds are to be applied next toward the costs of decontamination and debris removal operations ordered by the NRC, and any further remaining proceeds are to be paid either to the Company or to its bond trustees as may be appropriate under the policies and applicable trust indentures.
All retrospective assessments, whether generated for liability, property, or replacement power, may be subject to applicable state premium taxes.

II-236


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
10. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
On January 1, 2008, the Company adopted FASB Statement No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (SFAS No. 157) which defines fairFair value establishes a framework for measuring fair value, and requires additional disclosures about fair value measurements. The criterion that is set forth in SFAS No. 157 is applicable to fair value measurement where it is permitted or required under other accounting pronouncements.
SFAS No. 157 defines fair value as the exit price, which is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The fair value measurement ismeasurements are based on inputs of observable and unobservable market data that a market participant would use in pricing the asset or liability. The use of observable inputs is maximized where available and the use of unobservable inputs is minimized for fair value measurement. As a means to illustrate the inputs used, SFAS No. 157 establishesmeasurement and reflects a three-tier fair value hierarchy that prioritizes inputs to valuation techniques used for fair value measurement.
  Level 1 consists of observable market data in an active market for identical assets or liabilities.
 
  Level 2 consists of observable market data, other than that included in Level 1, that is either directly or indirectly observable.
 
  Level 3 consists of unobservable market data. The input may reflect the assumptions of the Company of what a market participant would use in pricing an asset or liability. If there is little available market data, then the Company’s own assumptions are the best available information.
In the case of multiple inputs being used in a fair value measurement, the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement represents the level in the fair value hierarchy in which the fair value measurement is reported.
The adoptionAs of SFAS No. 157 has not resulted in any significant changes to the methodologies used for fair value measurement. Primarily all the changes in the fair value ofDecember 31, 2009, assets and liabilities are recorded in other comprehensive income or regulatory assets and liabilities, and thus the impact on earnings is limited to derivatives that do not qualify for hedge accounting.
Themeasured at fair value measurements performed on a recurring basis andduring the period, together with the level of the fair value hierarchy in which they fall, at December 31, 2008 are as follows:
                                
At December 31, 2008: Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total
 Fair Value Measurements Using 
 Quoted Prices      
 in Active Significant    
 Markets for Other Significant  
 Identical Observable Unobservable  
 Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2009: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
 (in millions) (in millions)
 
Assets:  
Energy-related derivatives $ $4.7 $ $4.7 
Nuclear decommissioning trusts(a)
 260.3 198.8  459.1 
Cash equivalents and restricted cash 146.9   146.9 
Nuclear decommissioning trusts:(a)
 
Domestic equity $428 $1 $ $429 
U.S. Treasury and government agency securities  31  31 
Municipal bonds  23  23 
Corporate bonds  61  61 
Mortgage and asset backed securities  23  23 
Other  13  13 
Total fair value $407.2 $203.5 $ $610.7 
Total $428 $152 $ $580 
 
Liabilities:  
Energy-related derivatives $ $117.9 $ $117.9  $ $75 $ $75 
Interest rate derivatives  29.3  29.3   2  2 
Total fair value $ $147.2 $ $147.2 
Total $ $77 $ $77 
(a) Excludes receivables related to investment income, pending investment sales, and payables related to pending investment purchases.

II-237


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Energy-related derivatives and interest rate derivatives primarily consist of over-the-counter contracts. See Note 6 under “Financial Instruments”11 for additional information. The nuclear decommissioning trust funds are invested in a diversified mix of equity and fixed income securities. See Note 1 under “Nuclear Decommissioning” for additional information. The cash equivalents and restricted cash consist of securities with original maturities of 90 days or less. All of these financial instruments and investments are valued primarily using the market approach.

II-237


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
As of December 31, 2009, the fair value measurements of investments calculated at net asset value per share (or its equivalent), as well as the nature and risks of those investments, are as follows:
           
      Unfunded Redemption Redemption
As of December 31, 2009: Fair Value Commitments Frequency Notice Period
  (in millions)      
Nuclear decommissioning trusts:          
Corporate bonds – commingled funds $14  None Daily 1 to 3 days
Other – commingled funds  13  None Daily Not applicable
The commingled funds in the nuclear decommissioning trusts are invested primarily in a diversified portfolio of high grade money market instruments, including, but not limited to, commercial paper, notes, repurchase agreements, and other evidences of indebtedness with a maturity not exceeding 13 months from the date of purchase. The commingled funds will, however, maintain a dollar-weighted average portfolio maturity of 90 days or less. The assets may be longer term investment grade fixed income obligations having a maximum five year final maturity with put features or floating rates with a reset date of 13 months or less. The primary objective for the commingled funds is a high level of current income consistent with stability of principal and liquidity.
The Company’s financial instruments for which the carrying amount did not equal fair value at December 31 were as follows:
         
  Carrying Amount Fair Value
  (in millions)
Long-term debt:        
2009
 $7,973  $8,059 
2008 $7,219  $7,096 
The fair values were based on either closing market prices (Level 1) or closing prices of comparable instruments (Level 2).
11. DERIVATIVES
The Company is exposed to market risks, primarily commodity price risk and interest rate risk. To manage the volatility attributable to these exposures, the Company nets its exposures, where possible, to take advantage of natural offsets and enters into various derivative transactions for the remaining exposures pursuant to the Company’s policies in areas such as counterparty exposure and risk management practices. The Company’s policy is that derivatives are to be used primarily for hedging purposes and mandates strict adherence to all applicable risk management policies. Derivative positions are monitored using techniques including, but not limited to, market valuation, value at risk, stress testing, and sensitivity analysis. Derivative instruments are recognized at fair value in the balance sheets as either assets or liabilities.
Energy-Related Derivatives
The Company enters into energy-related derivatives to hedge exposures to electricity, gas, and other fuel price changes. However, due to cost-based rate regulations, the Company has limited exposure to market volatility in commodity fuel prices and prices of electricity. The Company manages fuel-hedging programs, implemented per the guidelines of the Georgia PSC, through the use of financial derivative contracts.
To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in electricity prices, the Company enters into physical fixed-price contracts for the purchase and sale of electricity through the wholesale electricity market. To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in gas prices, the Company may enter into fixed-price contracts for natural gas purchases; however, a significant portion of contracts are priced at market.

II-238


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Energy-related derivative contracts are accounted for in one of two methods:
Regulatory Hedges– Energy-related derivative contracts which are designated as regulatory hedges relate primarily to the Company’s fuel hedging programs, where gains and losses are initially recorded as regulatory liabilities and assets, respectively, and then are included in fuel expense as the underlying fuel is used in operations and ultimately recovered through the fuel cost recovery clauses.
Not Designated– Gains and losses on energy-related derivative contracts that are not designated or fail to qualify as hedges are recognized in the statements of income as incurred.
Some energy-related derivative contracts require physical delivery as opposed to financial settlement, which is both common and prevalent within the electric industry. When an energy-related derivative contract is settled physically, any cumulative unrealized gain or loss is reversed and the contract price is recognized in the respective line item representing the actual price of the underlying goods being delivered.
At December 31, 2009, the net volume of energy-related derivative contracts for natural gas positions for the Company, together with the longest hedge date over which it is hedging its exposure to the variability in future cash flows for forecasted transactions and the longest date for derivatives not designated as hedges, were as follows:
     
Net Longest  
Purchased Hedge Longest Non-Hedge
mmBtu* Date Date
(in millions)    
71 2014 
*mmBtu - million British thermal units
Interest Rate Derivatives
The Company also enters into interest rate derivatives, which include forward-starting interest rate swaps, to hedge exposure to changes in interest rates. Derivatives related to existing variable rate securities or forecasted transactions are accounted for as cash flow hedges. The derivatives employed as hedging instruments are structured to minimize ineffectiveness.
For cash flow hedges, the fair value gains or losses are recorded in other comprehensive income (OCI) and are reclassified into earnings at the same time the hedged transactions affect earnings.
At December 31, 2009, the Company had outstanding interest rate derivatives designated as cash flow hedges of existing debt as follows:
         
    Weighted   Fair Value
    Average   Gain (Loss)
Notional Variable Rate Fixed Rate Hedge Maturity December 31,
Amount Received Paid Date 2009
(in millions)       (in millions)
$300 1-month LIBOR 2.43% April 2010 $(2)
For the year ended December 31, 2009, the Company realized net losses of $19 million upon termination of certain interest rate derivatives at the same time it issued debt. The effective portion of these losses has been deferred in OCI and is being amortized to interest expense over the life of the original interest rate derivative, reflecting the period in which the forecasted hedged transaction affects earnings.
The estimated pre-tax losses that will be reclassified from OCI to interest expense for the next 12-month period ending December 31, 2010 are $12.8 million. The Company has deferred gains and losses that are expected to be amortized into earnings through 2037.

II-239


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Derivative Financial Statement Presentation and Amounts
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the fair value of energy-related derivatives and interest rate derivatives was reflected in the balance sheets as follows:
                         
  Asset Derivatives Liability Derivatives
  Balance Sheet         Balance Sheet    
Derivative Category Location 2009 2008 Location 2009 2008
      (in millions)     (in millions)
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments for regulatory purposes
                        
Energy-related derivatives: Other current
assets
 $  $5  Liabilities from risk management activities $47  $85 
  Other deferred
charges and assets
       Other deferred
credits and liabilities
  28   33 
 
Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments for regulatory purposes
     $  $5      $75  $118 
 
                         
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments in cash flow hedges
                        
Interest rate derivatives: Other current
assets
 $  $  Liabilities from risk
management activities
 $2  $28 
  Other deferred charges and assets       Other deferred credits and liabilities     1 
 
Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments in cash flow hedges
     $  $      $2  $29 
 
 
Total
     $  $5      $77  $147 
 
 
All derivative instruments are measured at fair value. See Note 10 for additional information.

At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the pre-tax effect of unrealized derivative gains (losses) arising from energy-related derivative instruments designated as regulatory hedging instruments and deferred on the balance sheets were as follows:
 
  Unrealized Losses Unrealized Gains
  Balance Sheet         Balance Sheet    
Derivative Category Location 2009 2008 Location 2009 2008
      (in millions)     (in millions)
Energy-related derivatives: Other regulatory assets, current $(47) $(85) Other regulatory liabilities, current $  $5 
  Other regulatory assets, deferred  (28)  (33) Other regulatory liabilities, deferred      
 
Total energy-related derivative gains (losses)
     $(75) $(118)     $  $5 
 

II-240


NOTES (continued)
Georgia Power Company 2009 Annual Report
For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, the pre-tax effect of interest rate derivatives designated as cash flow hedging instruments on the statements of income were as follows:
                             
  Gain (Loss) Recognized in Gain (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated OCI into Income
Derivatives in Cash Flow OCI on Derivative (Effective Portion)    
Hedging Relationships (Effective Portion)   Amount
Derivative Category 2009 2008 2007 Statements of Income Location 2009 2008 2007
  (in millions)     (in millions)    
Interest rate derivatives $(3) $(34) $(5) Interest expense $(22) $(3) $(1)
There was no material ineffectiveness recorded in earnings for any period presented.
For all years presented, the pre-tax effect of energy-related derivatives not designated as hedging instruments on the statements of income were immaterial.
Contingent Features
The Company has certain derivatives that could require collateral, but not accelerated payment, in the event of various credit rating changes of certain affiliated companies. At December 31, 2009, the fair value of derivative liabilities with contingent features was $17 million.
At December 31, 2009, the Company had no collateral posted with its derivative counterparties; however, because of the joint and several liability features underlying these derivatives, the maximum potential collateral requirements arising from the credit-risk-related contingent features, at a rating below BBB- and/or Baa3, is $33.3 million.
Currently, the Company has investment grade credit ratings from the major rating agencies with respect to debt, preferred securities, preferred stock, and preference stock.
Generally, collateral may be provided by a Southern Company guaranty, letter of credit, or cash. The Company participated in certain agreements that could require collateral in the event that one or more Southern Company system power pool participants has a credit rating change to below investment grade.
12. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL INFORMATION (UNAUDITED)
Summarized quarterly financial information for 20082009 and 20072008 is as follows:
                        
 Net Income After     Net Income After
 Operating Operating Dividends on Preferred Operating Operating Dividends on Preferred
Quarter Ended Revenues Income and Preference Stock Revenues Income and Preference Stock
 (in millions) (in millions)
March 2009
 $1,766 $272 $122 
June 2009
 1,874 369 190 
September 2009
 2,327 683 388 
December 2009
 1,725 206 114 
 
March 2008
 $1,865 $325 $176  $1,865 $325 $176 
June 2008
 2,111 442 248  2,111 442 248 
September 2008
 2,644 711 402  2,644 711 402 
December 2008
 1,792 182 77  1,792 182 77 
March 2007 $1,657 $279 $131 
June 2007 1,844 361 188 
September 2007 2,444 688 400 
December 2007 1,627 189 117 
The Company’s business is influenced by seasonal weather conditions.

II-238II-241


SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA 2004-20082005-2009
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                                        
 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005
Operating Revenues (in thousands)
 $8,411,552 $7,571,652 $7,245,644 $7,075,837 $5,727,768  $7,691,740 $8,411,552 $7,571,652 $7,245,644 $7,075,837 
Net Income after Dividends on Preferred and Preference Stock (in thousands)
 $902,927 $836,136 $787,225 $744,373 $682,793  $814,045 $902,927 $836,136 $787,225 $744,373 
Cash Dividends on Common Stock (in thousands)
 $721,200 $689,900 $630,000 $582,800 $588,700  $738,900 $721,200 $689,900 $630,000 $582,800 
Return on Average Common Equity (percent)
 13.56 13.50 13.80 14.08 13.87  11.01 13.56 13.50 13.80 14.08 
Total Assets (in thousands)
 $22,315,668 $20,822,761 $19,308,730 $17,898,445 $16,598,778  $24,294,566 $22,315,668 $20,822,761 $19,308,730 $17,898,445 
Gross Property Additions (in thousands)
 $1,953,448 $1,862,449 $1,276,889 $958,563 $1,252,197  $2,646,158 $1,953,448 $1,862,449 $1,276,889 $958,563 
Capitalization (in thousands):
  
Common stock equity $6,879,243 $6,435,420 $5,956,251 $5,452,083 $5,123,276  $7,902,925 $6,879,243 $6,435,420 $5,956,251 $5,452,083 
Preferred and preference stock 265,957 265,957 44,991 43,909 58,547  265,957 265,957 265,957 44,991 43,909 
Long-term debt 7,006,275 5,937,792 5,211,912 5,365,323 4,916,694  7,782,340 7,006,275 5,937,792 5,211,912 5,365,323 
Total (excluding amounts due within one year) $14,151,475 $12,639,169 $11,213,154 $10,861,315 $10,098,517  $15,951,222 $14,151,475 $12,639,169 $11,213,154 $10,861,315 
Capitalization Ratios (percent):
  
Common stock equity 48.6 50.9 53.1 50.2 50.7  49.5 48.6 50.9 53.1 50.2 
Preferred and preference stock 1.9 2.1 0.4 0.4 0.6  1.7 1.9 2.1 0.4 0.4 
Long-term debt 49.5 47.0 46.5 49.4 48.7  48.8 49.5 47.0 46.5 49.4 
Total (excluding amounts due within one year) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0  100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 
Security Ratings:
  
Preferred and Preference Stock -  
Moody’s Baa1 Baa1 Baa1 Baa1 Baa1  Baa1 Baa1 Baa1 Baa1 Baa1 
Standard and Poor’s BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ 
Fitch A A A A A  A A A A A 
Unsecured Long-Term Debt -  
Moody’s A2 A2 A2 A2 A2  A2 A2 A2 A2 A2 
Standard and Poor’s A A A A A  A A A A A 
Fitch A+ A+ A+ A+ A+  A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ 
Customers (year-end):
  
Residential 2,039,503 2,024,520 1,998,643 1,960,556 1,926,215  2,043,661 2,039,503 2,024,520 1,998,643 1,960,556 
Commercial 295,925 295,478 294,654 289,009 283,507  295,375 295,925 295,478 294,654 289,009 
Industrial 8,248 8,240 8,008 8,290 7,765  8,202 8,248 8,240 8,008 8,290 
Other 5,566 4,807 4,371 4,143 4,015  6,580 5,566 4,807 4,371 4,143 
Total 2,349,242 2,333,045 2,305,676 2,261,998 2,221,502  2,353,818 2,349,242 2,333,045 2,305,676 2,261,998 
Employees (year-end)
 9,337 9,270 9,278 9,273 9,294  8,599 9,337 9,270 9,278 9,273 
N/A = Not Applicable.

II-239II-242


SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA 2004-20082005-2009 (continued)
Georgia Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                                        
 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005
Operating Revenues (in thousands):
  
Residential $2,648,176 $2,442,501 $2,326,190 $2,227,137 $1,900,961  $2,686,155 $2,648,176 $2,442,501 $2,326,190 $2,227,137 
Commercial 2,917,270 2,576,058 2,423,568 2,357,077 1,933,004  2,825,602 2,917,270 2,576,058 2,423,568 2,357,077 
Industrial 1,640,407 1,403,852 1,382,213 1,406,295 1,217,536  1,318,070 1,640,407 1,403,852 1,382,213 1,406,295 
Other 80,492 75,592 73,649 73,854 67,250  82,576 80,492 75,592 73,649 73,854 
Total retail 7,286,345 6,498,003 6,205,620 6,064,363 5,118,751  6,912,403 7,286,345 6,498,003 6,205,620 6,064,363 
Wholesale — non-affiliates 568,797 537,913 551,731 524,800 251,581  394,538 568,797 537,913 551,731 524,800 
Wholesale — affiliates 286,219 277,832 252,556 275,525 172,375  111,964 286,219 277,832 252,556 275,525 
Total revenues from sales of electricity 8,141,361 7,313,748 7,009,907 6,864,688 5,542,707  7,418,905 8,141,361 7,313,748 7,009,907 6,864,688 
Other revenues 270,191 257,904 235,737 211,149 185,061  272,835 270,191 257,904 235,737 211,149 
Total $8,411,552 $7,571,652 $7,245,644 $7,075,837 $5,727,768  $7,691,740 $8,411,552 $7,571,652 $7,245,644 $7,075,837 
Kilowatt-Hour Sales (in thousands):
  
Residential 26,412,131 26,840,275 26,206,170 25,508,472 24,829,833  26,272,226 26,412,131 26,840,275 26,206,170 25,508,472 
Commercial 33,058,109 33,056,632 32,112,430 31,334,182 29,553,893  32,592,831 33,058,109 33,056,632 32,112,430 31,334,182 
Industrial 24,163,566 25,490,035 25,577,006 25,832,265 27,197,843  21,810,062 24,163,566 25,490,035 25,577,006 25,832,265 
Other 670,588 697,363 660,285 737,343 744,935  671,390 670,588 697,363 660,285 737,343 
Total retail 84,304,394 86,084,305 84,555,891 83,412,262 82,326,504  81,346,509 84,304,394 86,084,305 84,555,891 83,412,262 
Sales for resale — non-affiliates 9,756,260 10,577,969 10,685,456 10,588,891 5,429,911 
Sales for resale — affiliates 3,694,640 5,191,903 5,463,463 5,033,165 4,925,744 
Wholesale — non-affiliates 5,206,949 9,756,260 10,577,969 10,685,456 10,588,891 
Wholesale — affiliates 2,504,437 3,694,640 5,191,903 5,463,463 5,033,165 
Total 97,755,294 101,854,177 100,704,810 99,034,318 92,682,159  89,057,895 97,755,294 101,854,177 100,704,810 99,034,318 
Average Revenue Per Kilowatt-Hour (cents):
  
Residential 10.03 9.10 8.88 8.73 7.66  10.22 10.03 9.10 8.88 8.73 
Commercial 8.82 7.79 7.55 7.52 6.54  8.67 8.82 7.79 7.55 7.52 
Industrial 6.79 5.51 5.40 5.44 4.48  6.04 6.79 5.51 5.40 5.44 
Total retail 8.64 7.55 7.34 7.27 6.22  8.50 8.64 7.55 7.34 7.27 
Wholesale 6.36 5.17 4.98 5.12 4.09  6.57 6.36 5.17 4.98 5.12 
Total sales 8.33 7.18 6.96 6.93 5.98  8.33 8.33 7.18 6.96 6.93 
Residential Average Annual Kilowatt-Hour Use Per Customer
 12,969 13,315 13,216 13,119 13,002  12,848 12,969 13,315 13,216 13,119 
Residential Average Annual Revenue Per Customer
 $1,300 $1,212 $1,173 $1,145 $995  $1,314 $1,300 $1,212 $1,173 $1,145 
Plant Nameplate Capacity Ratings (year-end) (megawatts)
 15,995 15,995 15,995 15,995 14,743  15,995 15,995 15,995 15,995 15,995 
Maximum Peak-Hour Demand (megawatts):
  
Winter 14,221 13,817 13,528 14,360 13,087  15,173 14,221 13,817 13,528 14,360 
Summer 17,270 17,974 17,159 16,925 16,129  16,080 17,270 17,974 17,159 16,925 
Annual Load Factor (percent)
 58.4 57.5 61.8 59.4 61.0  60.7 58.4 57.5 61.8 59.4 
Plant Availability (percent):
  
Fossil-steam 90.95 90.8 91.4 90.0 87.1  92.5 91.0 90.8 91.4 90.0 
Nuclear 89.81 92.4 90.7 89.3 94.8  88.4 89.8 92.4 90.7 89.3 
Source of Energy Supply (percent):
  
Coal 58.7 61.5 59.0 60.7 57.6  52.3 58.7 61.5 59.0 60.7 
Nuclear 14.8 14.6 14.4 14.5 16.5  16.2 14.8 14.6 14.4 14.5 
Hydro 0.6 0.5 0.9 1.9 1.5  1.8 0.6 0.5 0.9 1.9 
Oil and gas 5.1 5.5 5.0 3.0 0.2  7.7 5.1 5.5 5.0 3.0 
Purchased power -  
From non-affiliates 5.1 3.8 3.8 4.6 6.0  4.4 5.1 3.8 3.8 4.6 
From affiliates 15.7 14.1 16.9 15.3 18.2  17.6 15.7 14.1 16.9 15.3 
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0  100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

II-240II-243


GULF POWER COMPANY
FINANCIAL SECTION

II-241II-244


MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Gulf Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
The management of Gulf Power Company (the “Company”) is responsible for establishing and maintaining an adequate system of internal control over financial reporting as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). A control system can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.
Under management’s supervision, an evaluation of the design and effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was conducted based on the framework inInternal Control—Integrated Frameworkissued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this evaluation, management concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2008.2009.
This Annual Report does not include an attestation report of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation by the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit the Company to provide only management’s report in this Annual Report.
/s/ Susan N. Story

Susan N. Story
President and Chief Executive Officer
/s/ Philip C. Raymond

Philip C. Raymond
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
February 25, 20092010

II-242II-245


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Gulf Power Company
We have audited the accompanying balance sheets and statements of capitalization of Gulf Power Company (the “Company”) (a wholly owned subsidiary of Southern Company) as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, and the related statements of income, comprehensive income, common stockholder’s equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008.2009. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such financial statements (pages II-266II-268 to II-296)II-306) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Gulf Power Company at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008,2009, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
February 25, 20092010

II-243II-246


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Gulf Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
OVERVIEW
Business Activities
Gulf Power Company (the Company) operates as a vertically integrated utility providing electricity to retail customers within its traditional service area located in northwest Florida and to wholesale customers in the Southeast.
Many factors affect the opportunities, challenges, and risks of the Company’s business of selling electricity. These factors include the ability to maintain a constructive regulatory environment, to maintain energy sales ingiven the midsteffects of the current economic downturn,recession, and to effectively manage and secure timely recovery of rising costs. These costs include those related to projected long-term demand growth, increasingly stringent environmental standards, fuel prices, and storm restoration costs. Appropriately balancing the need to recover these increasing costs with customer prices will continue to challenge the Company for the foreseeable future.
In July 2006, the Florida Public Service Commission (PSC) extended the storm-recovery surcharge currently being collected by the Company until June 2009. See Notes 1 and 3 to the financial statements under “Property Damage Reserve” and “Retail Regulatory Matters – Storm Damage Cost Recovery,” respectively, for additional information.
Key Performance Indicators
In striving to maximize shareholder value while providing cost-effective energy to over 425,000 customers, the Company continues to focus on several key indicators. These indicators include customer satisfaction, plant availability, system reliability, and net income after dividends on preference stock. The Company’s financial success is directly tied to the satisfaction of its customers. Key elements of ensuring customer satisfaction include outstanding service, high reliability, and competitive prices. Management uses customer satisfaction surveys and reliability indicators to evaluate the Company’s results.
Peak season equivalent forced outage rate (Peak Season EFOR) is an indicator of plant availability and efficient generation fleet operations during the months when generation needs are greatest. The rate is calculated by dividing the number of hours of forced outages by total generation hours. The 20082009 Peak Season EFOR of 2.47%2.11% was better than the target. Transmission and distribution system reliability performance is measured by the frequency and duration of outages. Performance targets for reliability are set internally based on historical performance, expected weather conditions, and expected capital expenditures. The performance for 20082009 was atbetter than the target for these reliability measures. The performance for net income after dividends on preference stock in 20082009 was below target. Net income after dividends on preference stock is the primary componentmeasure of the Company’s contribution to Southern Company’s earnings per share goal.financial performance.
The Company’s 20082009 results compared with its targets for some of these key indicators are reflected in the following chart:
        
 2008 2008 2009 2009
 Target Actual Target Actual
Key Performance Indicator Performance Performance Performance Performance
 Top quartile in  
Customer Satisfaction
 customer surveys Top quartile Top quartile in
customer surveys
 Top quartile
Peak Season EFOR
 3.00% or less 2.47% 3.00% or less 2.11%
Net Income
 $102 million $98 million
Net income after dividends on preference stock
 $112.5 million $111.2 million
See RESULTS OF OPERATIONS herein for additional information on the Company’s financial performance.
Earnings
The Company’s 2009 net income after dividends on preference stock was $111.2 million, an increase of $12.9 million from the previous year. In 2008, net income after dividends on preference stock was $98.3 million, an increase of $14.2 million from the previous year. In 2007, earnings werenet income after dividends on preference stock was $84.1 million, an increase of $8.1 million from the previous year. In 2006, earnings were $76.0 million, an increase of $0.8 million from the previous year. The increase in earningsnet income after dividends on preference stock in 2009 was due primarily to increased allowance for funds used during construction (AFUDC) equity, which is non-taxable, and decreased interest expense, net of amounts capitalized, partially offset by unfavorable weather and a decline in sales. The increase in net income after dividends on preference stock in 2008 was due primarily to higher wholesale revenues from non-affiliates, increased allowance forAFUDC equity, funds used during construction, and a gain on the sale of assets.

II-244II-247


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
The increase in earningsnet income after dividends on preference stock in 2007 was due primarily to increases in retail revenues, earnings on additional investments in environmental controls through the environment cost recovery provision, and related allowance forAFUDC equity, funds used during construction, partially offset by non-fuel operating expenses. The increase in earnings in 2006 was due primarily to higher operating revenues partially offset by higher operating expenses, higher financing costs, and increases in depreciation expense. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “PSC Matters – Storm Damage Cost Recovery” herein.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
A condensed statement of income follows:
                                
 Increase (Decrease) Increase (Decrease)
 Amount from Prior Year Amount from Prior Year
 2008 2008 2007 2006 2009 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions)  (in millions)
Operating revenues $1,387.2 $127.4 $55.9 $120.3  $1,302.2 $(84.9) $127.4 $55.9 
Fuel 635.6 62.2 38.5 119.1  573.4  (62.2) 62.2 38.5 
Purchased power 109.4 37.9  (2.3)  (24.6) 92.0  (17.4) 37.9  (2.3)
Other operations and maintenance 277.5 7.1 10.9 9.8  260.3  (17.2) 7.1 10.9 
Depreciation and amortization 84.8  (0.8)  (3.6) 4.2  93.4 8.6  (0.8)  (3.6)
Taxes other than income taxes 87.2 4.2 3.2 3.4  94.5 7.3 4.2 3.2 
Total operating expenses 1,194.5 110.6 46.7 111.9  1,113.6  (80.9) 110.6 46.7 
Operating income 192.7 16.8 9.2 8.4  188.6  (4.0) 16.8 9.2 
Total other income and (expense)  (34.1) 6.7 1.3  (4.8)  (18.2) 15.8 6.7 1.3 
Income taxes 54.1 7.0 1.8 0.3  53.0  (1.1) 7.0 1.8 
Net Income 104.5 16.5 8.7 3.3 
Dividends on Preference Stock 6.2 2.3 0.6 2.5 
Net income 117.4 12.9 16.5 8.7 
Dividends on preference stock 6.2  2.3 0.6 
Net Income after Dividends on Preference Stock $98.3 $14.2 $8.1 $0.8 
Net income after dividends on preference stock $111.2 $12.9 $14.2 $8.1 
Operating Revenues
Operating revenues increased in 2008 when compared to 2007 and 2006.for 2009 were $1.3 billion, a decrease of $85.0 million from the previous year. The following table summarizes the significant changes in operating revenues for the past three years:
                        
 Amount Amount
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
Retail — prior year $1,006.3 $952.0 $864.9  $1,120.8 $1,006.3 $952.0 
Estimated change in -  
Rates and pricing 6.3 2.5 14.2  33.0 6.3 2.5 
Sales growth  (4.6) 5.8 2.5 
Sales growth (decline)  (5.7)  (4.6) 5.8 
Weather 3.9 1.2 2.4   (4.5) 3.9 1.2 
Fuel and other cost recovery 108.9 44.8 68.0   (37.0) 108.9 44.8 
Retail — current year 1,120.8 1,006.3 952.0  1,106.6 1,120.8 1,006.3 
Wholesale revenues -  
Non-affiliates 97.1 83.5 87.2  94.1 97.1 83.5 
Affiliates 107.0 113.2 118.1  32.1 107.0 113.2 
Total wholesale revenues 204.1 196.7 205.3  126.2 204.1 196.7 
Other operating revenues 62.3 56.8 46.6  69.4 62.3 56.8 
Total operating revenues $1,387.2 $1,259.8 $1,203.9  $1,302.2 $1,387.2 $1,259.8 
Percent change  10.1%  4.6%  11.1%  (6.1)%  10.1%  4.6%
Retail revenues decreased $14.2 million, or 1.3%, in 2009, increased $114.4 million, or 11.4%, in 2008, and increased $54.3 million, or 5.7%, in 2007, and $87.2 million, or 10.1%, in 2006. The significant factors driving these changes are shown in the table above.2007.

II-245II-248


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Revenues associated with changes in rates and pricing include cost recovery provisions for energy conservation costs and environmental compliance costs. Annually, the Company petitions the Florida PSCPublic Service Commission (PSC) for recovery of projected costs, including any true-up amount from prior periods, and approved rates are implemented each January. The recovery provisions include related expenses and a return on average net investment. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters – Environmental Cost Recovery” for additional information. See “Energy Sales” below for a discussion of changes in the volume of energy sold, including changes relating to sales growth (or decline) and weather.
Fuel and other cost recovery provisions include fuel expenses, the energy component of purchased power costs, and purchased power capacity costs. Annually, the Company petitions the Florida PSC for recovery of projected fuel and purchased power costs, including any true-up amount from prior periods, and approved rates are implemented each January. Cost recovery provisions also include revenues related to the recovery of storm damage restoration costs. The recovery provisions generally equal the related expenses and have no material effect on net income. See Note 1 to the financial statements under “Revenues” and “Property Damage Reserve” and Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters – Storm Damage Cost Recovery” and “Retail Regulatory Matters – Fuel Cost Recovery” for additional information.
Total wholesale revenues were $126.2 million in 2009, a decrease of $77.8 million, or 38.2%, compared to 2008 primarily due to decreased energy sales to affiliates at a lower cost per kilowatt-hour (KWH). Total wholesale revenues were $204.1 million in 2008, an increase of $7.4 million, or 3.7%, compared to 2007 primarily due to higher capacity revenues associated with new and existing territorial wholesale contracts with non-affiliated companies. Total wholesale revenues were $196.7 million in 2007, a decrease of $8.5 million, or 4.2%, compared to 2006 primarily due to decreased energy sales to affiliates at a lower cost per kilowatt-hour (KWH)KWH supplied by lower-cost generating resources. Total wholesale revenues were $205.2 million in 2006, an increase of $29.5 million, or 16.8%, compared to 2005, primarily due to increased energy sales to affiliates to serve their territorial energy requirements.
Wholesale revenues from sales to non-affiliates will vary depending on the market cost of available energy compared to the cost of the
Company and Southern Company system-owned generation, demand for energy with the Southern Company service territory, and availability of Southern Company system generation.
Wholesale revenues from sales to non-affiliates include unit power sales under long-term contracts to other Florida utilities. Wholesale revenues from contracts have both capacity and energy components. Capacity revenues reflect the recovery of fixed costs and a return on investment. Energy is generally sold at variable cost. The capacity and energy components under these unit power sales contracts were as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
Unit power sales -  
Capacity $22,028 $18,073 $21,477  $24,466 $22,028 $18,073 
Energy 33,767 36,245 34,597  33,122 33,767 36,245 
Total 55,795 54,318 56,074  57,588 55,795 54,318 
Other power sales -  
Capacity and other 10,890 2,397 2,436  11,060 10,890 2,397 
Energy 30,380 26,799 28,632  25,457 30,380 26,799 
Total 41,270 29,196 31,068  36,517 41,270 29,196 
Total non-affiliated $97,065 $83,514 $87,142  $94,105 $97,065 $83,514 
Wholesale revenues from sales to affiliated companies within the Southern Company system will vary from year to year depending on demand and the availability and cost of generating resources at each system company. These affiliated sales, andalong with purchases from affiliates, are made in accordance with the Intercompany Interchange Contract (IIC), as approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). These transactions do not have a significant impact on earnings, since the energy is generally sold at marginal cost and energy purchases are generally offset by revenues through the Company’s fuel cost recovery clause.
Other operating revenues increased $7.1 million, or 11.3%, in 2009 primarily due to other energy services and franchise fees, offset by transmission and distribution network services and timber sales. Other operating revenues increased $5.6 million, or 9.9%, in 2008 primarily due to transmission and distribution network services and other energy services. Other operating revenues increased $10.2 million, or 21.8%, in 2007 primarily due to other energy services and an increase in franchise fees. The increased revenues from other energy services did not have a material impact on earnings since they were generally offset by associated expenses. Other operating revenues increased $10.2 million, or 21.8%, in 2007, primarily due to other energy services and an increase in franchiseFranchise fees which were proportional to changes in revenue. Other operating revenues increased $3.6 million, or 8.3%, in 2006, primarily due to an increase in franchise fees, which were proportional to changes in revenue.have no impact on net income.

II-246II-249


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Energy Sales
Changes in revenues are influenced heavily by the change in the volume of energy sold from year to year. KWH sales for 20082009 and the percent change by year were as follows:
                                
 KWHs Percent Change KWHs Percent Change
 2008 2008 2007 2006 2009 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions)  (in millions) 
Residential 5,349  (2.3)%  0.9%  2.0% 5,255  (1.8)%  (2.3)%  0.9%
Commercial 3,961  (0.3) 3.3 2.9  3,896  (1.6)  (0.3) 3.3 
Industrial 2,210 7.9  (4.1)  (1.1) 1,727  (21.9) 7.9  (4.1)
Other 23  (5.1) 4.2 5.1  25 8.1  (5.1) 4.2 
Total retail 11,543 0.2 0.8 1.7  10,903  (5.5) 0.2 0.8 
Wholesale  
Non-affiliates 1,817  (18.4) 7.1  (9.4) 1,813  (0.2)  (18.4) 7.1 
Affiliates 1,871  (35.1)  (1.8) 48.6  870  (53.5)  (35.1)  (1.8)
Total wholesale 3,688  (27.8) 1.9 17.4  2,683  (27.2)  (27.8) 1.9 
Total energy sales 15,231  (8.4) 1.1 6.0  13,586  (10.8)  (8.4) 1.1 
Changes in retail energy sales are comprised of changes in electricity usage by customers, changes in weather, and changes in the number of customers.
Residential energy sales decreased 1.8% in 2009 compared to 2008 primarily due to the recessionary economy. Residential energy sales decreased 2.3% in 2008 compared to 2007 primarily due to decreased customer usage as a result of a slowing economy, partially offset by more favorable weather. Residential energy sales increased 0.9% in 2007 compared to 2006 primarily due to more favorable weather conditions and customer growth, partially offset by customer response to higher prices. Residential
Commercial energy sales increased 2.0%decreased 1.6% in 2006,2009 compared to 2005,2008 primarily due to more favorable weather conditionsthe recessionary economy and customer growth.
a decrease in the number of customers. The change in commercial energy sales in 2008 compared to 2007 was immaterial. Commercial energy sales increased 3.3% in 2007 compared to 2006 primarily due to more favorable weather conditions and customer growth. Commercial
Industrial energy sales increased 2.9%decreased 21.9% in 2006,2009 compared to 2005,2008 primarily due to more favorable weather conditionsincreased customer co-generation due to the lower cost of natural gas in 2009, decreased demand, and customer growth.
a business closure due to the recessionary economy. Industrial energy sales increased 7.9% in 2008 compared to 2007 primarily due to decreased customer co-generation due to the higher cost of natural gas.Industrial energy sales decreased 4.1% in 2007 compared to 2006 primarily due to a conversion project by a major forest products manufacturer and a production process change by a major petroleum company. Industrial energy sales decreased 1.1% in 2006, compared to 2005, due to reduced demand for and production of building materials and a conversion project by a major paper manufacturer.
Wholesale energy sales to non-affiliates decreased 0.2% in 2009, decreased 18.4% in 2008, and increased 7.1% in 2007, and decreased 9.4% in 2006, each compared to the prior yearyear. The decrease in 2009 was primarily as a result of the recessionary economy. The changes in 2008 and 2007 were primarily the result of fluctuations in the fuel cost to produce energy sold to non-affiliated utilities under both long-term and short-term contracts. The degree to which prices for oil and natural gas, prices, which are the primary fuel sources for these customers, differ from the Company’s fuel costs will influence these changes in sales. The fluctuations in sales have a minimal effect on earnings because the energy is generally sold at marginal cost.
Wholesale energy sales to affiliates decreased 53.5% in 2009, 35.1% in 2008, and decreased 1.8% in 2007, compared to prior years,years. The decrease in 2009 was primarily a result of the recessionary economy. The decreases in 2008 and 2007 were primarily due to the availability of lower cost generation resources at affiliated companies. Wholesale energy sales to affiliates increased 48.6% in 2006 compared to 2005, primarily due to increased territorial energy requirements of affiliates.

II-250


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Fuel and Purchased Power Expenses
Fuel costs constitute the single largest expense for the Company. The mix of fuel sources for generation of electricity is determined primarily by demand, the unit cost of fuel consumed, and the availability of generating units. Additionally, the Company purchases a portion of its electricity needs from the wholesale market.

II-247


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Details of the Company’s electricity generated and purchased were as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
Total generation(millions of KWHs)
 14,762 16,657 16,349  12,895 14,762 16,657 
Total purchased power(millions of KWHs)
 1,187 798 876  1,481 1,187 798 
Sources of generation(percent)-
  
Coal  84%  86%  87%  69%  84%  86%
Gas 16 14 13  31 16 14 
Cost of fuel, generated(cents per net KWH)-
  
Coal 3.58 2.86 2.68  4.27 3.58 2.86 
Gas 8.02 6.91 7.24  4.66 8.02 6.91 
Average cost of fuel, generated(cents per net KWH)
 4.31 3.44 3.27 
Average cost of fuel, generated(cents per net KWH)*
 4.39 4.31 3.44 
Average cost of purchased power(cents per net KWH)
 9.21 8.96 8.43  6.71 9.21 8.96 
*Fuel includes fuel purchased by the Company for tolling agreements where power is generated by the provider and is included in purchased power when determining the average cost of purchased power.
Total fuel and purchased power expenses were $665.4 million in 2009, a decrease of $79.6 million, or 10.7%, below the prior year costs. The net decrease in fuel and purchased power expenses was primarily due to a $53.3 million decrease related to total KWHs generated and purchased and a $26.3 million decrease in the cost of energy primarily resulting from a decrease in the average cost of natural gas. Total fuel and purchased power expenses were $745.0 million in 2008, an increase of $100.1 million, or 15.5%, above the prior year costs. The net increase in fuel and purchased power expenses was due to a $130.5 million increase in the average cost of fuel and purchased power as well as a $34.9 million increase inrelated to KWHs purchased, offset by a $65.3 million decrease inrelated to KWHs generated. Total fuel and purchased power expenses were $644.9 million in 2007, an increase of $36.2 million, or 5.9%, above the prior year costs. The net increase in fuel and purchased power expenses was due to a $32.6 million increase in the average cost of fuel and purchased power as well as a $10.1 million increase inrelated to KWHs generated, offset by a $6.5 million decrease inrelated to KWHs purchased. Total fuel and purchased power expenses were $608.7
Fuel expense was $573.4 million in 2006, an increase2009, a decrease of $94.5$62.2 million, or 18.4%9.8%, abovebelow the prior year costs. The net increase in fuel and purchased power expensesThis decrease was due to an $82.7 million increaseprimarily the result of a 41.9% decrease in the average cost of fuelnatural gas and purchased power as well as a $36.7 million increase12.6% decrease in KWHs generated as a result of lower demand, partially offset by a $24.9 million decreasean increase of 19.3% in KWHs purchased.
the average cost of coal per KWH generated. Fuel expense was $635.6 million in 2008, an increase of $62.2 million, or 10.9%, above the prior year costs. This increase was the result of a $127.5 million25.3% increase in the average cost of fuel, offset by a $65.3 millionan 11.4% decrease related to totalin KWHs generated. Fuel expense was $573.4 million in 2007, an increase of $38.5 million, or 7.2%, above the prior year costs. This increase was the result of a $28.4 million5.2% increase in the average cost of fuel and a $10.1 million1.9% increase related to totalin KWHs generated. Fuel
Purchased power expense was $534.9$92.0 million in 2006, an increase2009, a decrease of $119.1$17.4 million, or 28.7%15.9%, abovebelow the prior year costs. This increasedecrease was primarily the result of an $82.4 million increasea 27.1% decrease in the average cost per KWH purchased, offset by a 24.8% increase in the volume of fuel and a $36.7 million increase related to total KWHs generated.
purchased. Purchased power expense was $109.4 million in 2008, an increase of $37.9 million, or 53.0%, above the prior year costs. This increase was the result of a $34.9 million48.8% increase in total KWHs purchased and a $3.0 million2.8% increase resulting fromin the higher average cost per net KWH. Purchased power expense was $71.5 million in 2007, a decrease of $2.3 million, or 3.1%, below the prior year costs. This decrease was the result of a $6.5 millionan 8.9% decrease in total KWHs purchased, offset by a $4.2 million6.3% increase resulting fromin the higher average cost per net KWH. Purchased power expense was $73.8 million in 2006, a decrease of $24.6 million, or 25.0%, below the prior year costs. This decrease was the result of a $24.9 million decrease in total KWHs purchased, offset by a $0.3 million increase resulting from the higher average cost per net KWH.
Over the last several years, coalCoal prices have beencontinued to be influenced by a worldwide increase in demand from developing countries, as well as increases inincreased mining and fuel transportation costs. In the first half of 2008,While coal prices reached unprecedented high levels primarily due to increased demand following more moderate pricing in 20062008, the recessionary economy pushed prices downward in 2009. However, the lower prices did not fully offset the higher priced coal already in inventory and 2007. Despite these fluctuations, fuel inventories have been adequate and fuel supply markets have been sufficient to meet expected fuel requirements.under long-term contract. Demand for natural gas in the United States also increased in 2007 andwas affected by the first half of 2008. However,recessionary economy leading to significantly lower natural gas supplies increased in the last half of 2008 as a result of increased production and higher storage levels due in part to weak industrial demand. Both coal and natural gas prices moderated in the second half of 2008 as the result of a recessionary economy.prices.
Fuel expenses generally do not affect net income, since they are offset by fuel revenues under the Company’s fuel cost recovery provisions. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “PSC Matters – Fuel Cost Recovery” herein for additional information.

II-248II-251


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Other Operations and Maintenance Expenses
In 2009, other operations and maintenance expenses decreased $17.2 million, or 6.2%, compared to the prior year primarily due to a $14.4 million decrease in administrative and general expense, most of which is related to decreased storm recovery costs, and a $6.7 million decrease in power generation, most of which is related to scheduled and unscheduled maintenance and cost containment activities in an effort to offset the effects of the recessionary economy. This decrease was partially offset by a $4.8 million increase in other energy services. In 2008, other operations and maintenance expenses increased $7.1 million, or 2.6%, compared to the prior year primarily due to an $8.2 million increase in scheduled and unscheduled maintenance at generation facilities. In 2007, other operations and maintenance expenses increased $10.9 million, or 4.2%, compared to the prior year primarily due to a $5.0 million increase in other energy services and a $4.3 million increase in severance costs associated with a reorganization. The increased expenses from other energy services did not have a material impact on earnings since they were generally offset by associated revenue. In 2007, the Company offered both voluntary and involuntary severance to a number of employees in connection with a reorganization of certain functions. In 2006, other operations
Depreciation and maintenance expensesAmortization
Depreciation and amortization expense increased $9.8$8.6 million, or 3.9%10.1%, in 2009 compared to the prior year primarily due to a $4.2 million increase in the recoveryadditions of incurred costs for storm damage activity as approved by the Florida PSC, a $1.9 million increase in employee benefit expenses,environmental control projects at Plant Crist and a $1.1 million increase in property insurance costs. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “PSC Matters – Storm Damage Cost Recovery” hereinPlant Scherer and Notes 1other net additions to generation and 3 to the financial statements under “Property Damage Reserve” and “Retail Regulatory Matters – Storm Damage Cost Recovery,” respectively, for additional information.
Depreciation and Amortization
distribution facilities. Depreciation and amortization expense decreased $0.8 million, or 0.9%, in 2008 compared to the prior year primarily as a result of a $3.8 million gain on the sale of a building. The decrease was partially offset by an increase of $3.0 million in depreciation due to net additions to generation and distribution facilities. Depreciation and amortization expense decreased $3.6 million, or 4.0%, in 2007 compared to the prior year primarily due to new depreciation rates implemented in January 2007. Depreciation and amortization expense
Taxes Other Than Income Taxes
Taxes other than income taxes increased $4.2$7.3 million, or 4.9%8.3%, in 20062009 compared to the prior year primarily due to the construction of environmental control projects at Plants Crista $5.6 million increase in gross receipts and Daniel that were placedfranchise taxes, which have no impact on net income, and a $1.6 million increase in service in 2005.
Taxes Other Than Income Taxes
property taxes. Taxes other than income taxes increased $4.2 million, or 5.1%, in 2008 compared to the prior year primarily due to a $1.9 million decrease in 2007 related to the resolution of a dispute regarding property taxes in Monroe County, Georgia and a $1.9 million increase in franchise and gross receipt taxes, which were directly related to the increase in retail revenues.taxes. Taxes other than income taxes increased $3.2 million, or 4.0%, in 2007 and $3.4 million, or 4.5%, in 2006compared to the prior year primarily due to increases in franchise and gross receipts taxes, which were directly related to the increase in retail revenues.taxes.
Allowance for Equity Funds Used During Construction Equity
Allowance forAFUDC equity funds used duringincreased $13.8 million, or 138.8%, in 2009 compared to the prior year primarily due to construction (AFUDC)of environmental control projects at Plant Crist and Plant Scherer. AFUDC equity increased $7.6 million, or 319.9%, in 2008 compared to the prior year primarily due to construction of environmental control projects at Plant Crist and Plant Scherer. AFUDC equity increased $2.0 million, or 554.0%, in 2007 compared to the prior year primarily due to construction of an environmental control project at Plant Crist. AFUDC decreased $0.8 million, or 68.9%, in 2006 compared to the prior year primarily due to the completion of an environmental control project at Plant Crist Unit 7 during 2005. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “Environmental Matters – Environmental Statutes and Regulations” herein and Note 1 to the financial statements under “Allowance for Funds Used During Construction (AFUDC)” for additional information.
Interest Income
Interest income decreased $2.7 million, or 86.6%, in 2009 compared to the prior year primarily due to decreases in interest received related to the recovery of financing costs associated with the fuel clause. Interest income decreased $2.2 million, or 41%, in 2008 primarily as a result of lower variable interest rates charged against the under recovered fuel balance and a decrease in the property damage reserve balance. Interest income increased $0.1 million, or 2.3%, in 2007 and increased $1.4 million, or 37.4%, in 2006 compared to the prior year primarily due to interest received related to the recovery of financing costs associated with the fuel clause and incurred costs for storm damage activity as approved by the Florida PSC. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL – “PSC Matters – Storm DamageFuel Cost Recovery” herein and Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters – Storm DamageFuel Cost Recovery” for additional information.

II-249II-252


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Interest Expense, Net of Amounts Capitalized
Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized decreased $4.7 million, or 11.0%, in 2009 compared to the prior year as the result of an increase in capitalization of AFUDC debt related to the construction of environmental control projects at Plant Crist and Plant Scherer. Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized decreased $1.6 million, or 3.5%, in 2008 compared to the prior year as the result of an increase in capitalization of AFUDC debt related to the construction of environmental control projects and the redemption of $41.2 million of long-term debt payable to an affiliated trust in 2007. These decreases were offset by the issuance of a $110 million term loan agreement in 2008. Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized increased $0.5 million, or 1.2%, in 2007 compared to the prior year and was not material. Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized increased $3.8
Income Taxes
Income taxes decreased $1.1 million, or 9.5%2.0%, in 2006 compared to the prior year as the result of higher interest rates on variable rate pollution control bonds, increased levels of short-term borrowings at higher interest rates, and the issuance of $60 million in senior notes in August 2005. These increases were partially offset by the maturity of a $100 million bank note in October 2005 and the extinguishment of $30 million aggregate principal amount of first mortgage bonds in 2005.
Other Income (Expense), Net
Other expense, net increased $0.2 million, or 4.9%, in 2008, and increased $0.3 million, or 9.2%, in 2007, compared to prior years and was not material. Other expense, net increased $1.5 million, or 79.1%, in 20062009, compared to the prior year primarily as a result of changesdue to the tax benefit associated with an increase in charitable contributions.
Income Taxes
AFUDC, which is non-taxable, partially offset by higher earnings before taxes. Income taxes increased $7.0 million, or 14.9%, in 2008, compared to the prior year primarily due to higher earnings before income taxes and a decrease in the federal production activities deduction, partially offset by the tax benefit associated with an increase in AFUDC, which is non-taxable. Income taxes increased $1.8 million, or 4.0%, in 2007, and increased $0.3 million, or 0.7%, in 2006 compared to the prior yearsyear primarily as a result of higher earnings before income taxes. See Note 5 to the financial statements under “Effective Tax Rate” for additional information.
Effects of Inflation
The Company is subject to rate regulation that is generally based on the recovery of historical and projected costs. When historical costs are included, or when inflation exceeds projected costs used in rate regulation or market-based prices, theThe effects of inflation can create an economic loss since the recovery of costs could be in dollars that have less purchasing power. In addition, the income tax laws are based on historical costs. While the inflation rate has been relatively low in recent years, it continues to have anAny adverse effect of inflation on the Company becauseCompany’s results of the large investment in utility plant with long economic lives. Conventional accounting for historical cost doesoperations has not recognize this economic loss or the partially offsetting gain that arises through financing facilities with fixed-money obligations such as long-term debt, preference stock, and preferred securities. Any recognition of inflation by regulatory authorities is reflected in the rate of return allowed in the Company’s approved electric rates.been substantial.
FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL
General
The Company operates as a vertically integrated utility providing electricity to retail customers within its traditional service area located in northwest Florida and to wholesale customers in the Southeast. Prices for electricity provided by the Company to retail customers are set by the Florida PSC under cost-based regulatory principles. Prices for electricity relating to wholesale electricity sales, interconnecting transmission lines, and the exchange of electric power are regulated by the FERC. Retail rates and earnings are reviewed and may be adjusted periodically within certain limitations. See ACCOUNTING POLICIES – “Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates – Electric Utility Regulation” herein and Note 3 to the financial statements for additional information about regulatory matters.
The results of operations for the past three years are not necessarily indicative of future earnings potential. The level of the Company’s future earnings depends on numerous factors that affect the opportunities, challenges, and risks of the Company’s business of selling electricity. These factors include the Company’s ability to maintain a constructive regulatory environment that continues to allow for the recovery of all prudently incurred costs during a time of increasing costs. Future earnings in the near term will depend,

II-250


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
in part, upon maintaining energy sales, during the current economic downturn, which is subject to a number of factors. These factors include weather, competition, new energy contracts with neighboring utilities, energy conservation practiced by customers, the price of electricity, the price elasticity of demand, and the rate of economic growth or decline in the Company’s service area. Recent recessionaryRecessionary conditions have negatively impacted sales growth.and are expected to continue to have a negative impact, particularly to industrial and commercial customers. The timing and extent of the economic recovery will impact future earnings.
Environmental Matters
Compliance costs related to the Clean Air Act and other environmental statutes and regulations could affect earnings if such costs cannot continue to be fully recovered in rates on a timely basis. Environmental compliance spending over the next several years may exceed amounts estimated. Some of the factors driving the potential for such an increase are higher commodity costs, market demand for labor, and scope additions and clarifications. The timing, specific requirements, and estimated costs could also change as environmental statutes and regulations are adopted or modified. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Environmental Matters” for additional information.

II-253


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
New Source Review Actions
In November 1999, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) brought a civil action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, including Alabama Power Company (Alabama Power) and Georgia Power Company (Georgia Power), alleging that these subsidiaries had violated the New Source Review (NSR) provisions of the Clean Air Act and related state laws at certain coal-fired generating facilities. The EPAThese actions were filed concurrently issuedwith the issuance of notices of violation relatingof the NSR provisions to the Company with respect to the Company’s Plant Crist and a unit at Georgia Power’s Plant Scherer that is partially owned by the Company. In early 2000, the EPA filed a motion to amend its complaint to add the allegations in the notice of violation and to add the Company as a defendant. However, in March 2001, the court denied the motion based on lack of jurisdiction, and the EPA has not refiled.Crist. After Alabama Power was dismissed from the original action, for jurisdictional reasons, the EPA filed a separate action in January 2001 against Alabama Power in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. In these lawsuits, the EPA allegedalleges that NSR violations occurred at eight coal-fired generating facilities operated by Alabama Power and Georgia Power.Power, including one facility co-owned by the Company. The civil actions request penalties and injunctive relief, including an order requiring installation of the best available control technology at the affected units. The original action, now solely against Georgia Power, has been administratively closed since the spring of 2001, and the case has not been reopened.
In June 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama entered a consent decree between Alabama Power and the EPA, resolving a portion of the Alabama Power lawsuit relating to the alleged NSR violations at Plant Miller. The consent decree required Alabama Power to pay $100,000 to resolve the government’s claim for a civil penalty and to donate $4.9 million of sulfur dioxide emission allowances to a nonprofit charitable organization. It also formalized specific emissions reductions to be accomplished by Alabama Power, consistent with other Clean Air Act programs that require emissions reductions. In August 2006, the district court in Alabama granted Alabama Power’s motion for summary judgment and entered final judgment in favor of Alabama Power on the EPA’s claims related to all of the remaining plants: Plants Barry, Gaston, Gorgas, and Greene County.
The plaintiffs appealed the district court’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, where the appeal was stayed, pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in a similar case against Duke Energy. The Supreme Court issued its decision in the Duke Energy case in April 2007, and in December 2007, the Eleventh Circuit vacated the district court’s decision in the Alabama Power case and remanded the case back to the district court for consideration of the legal issues in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Duke Energy case. On July 24, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama granted partial summary judgment in favor of Alabama Power with respect to its other affected units regarding the proper legal test for determining whether projects are routine maintenance, repair, and replacement and therefore are excluded from NSR permitting. The decision did not resolve the case, and the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.which remains ongoing.
The Company believes that it complied with applicable laws and the EPA regulations and interpretations in effect at the time the work in question took place. The Clean Air Act authorizes maximum civil penalties of $25,000 to $37,500 per day, per violation at each generating unit, depending on the date of the alleged violation. An adverse outcome in this matter could require substantial capital expenditures or affect the timing of currently budgeted capital expenditures that cannot be determined at this time and could possibly require payment of substantial penalties. Such expenditures could affect future results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.

II-251


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Carbon Dioxide Litigation
New York Case
In July 2004, three environmental groups and attorneys general from eight states, each outside of Southern Company’s service territory, and the corporation counsel for New York City filed complaints in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against Southern Company and four other electric power companies. The complaints allege that the companies’ emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, contribute to global warming, which the plaintiffs assert is a public nuisance. Under common law public and private nuisance theories, the plaintiffs seek a judicial order (1) holding each defendant jointly and severally liable for creating, contributing to, and/or maintaining global warming and (2) requiring each of the defendants to cap its emissions of carbon dioxide and then reduce those emissions by a specified percentage each year for at least a decade. The plaintiffs have not, however, requested that damages be awarded in connection with their claims. Southern Company believes these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. In September 2005, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted Southern Company’s and the other defendants’ motions to dismiss these cases. The plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in October 2005 but no decision has been issued. Theand, on September 21, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the district court’s ruling, vacating the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claim, and remanding the case to the district court. On November 5, 2009, the defendants, including Southern Company, sought rehearing en banc, and the court’s ruling is subject to potential appeal. Therefore, the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Kivalina Case
OnIn February 26, 2008, the Native Village of Kivalina and the City of Kivalina filed a suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against several electric utilities (including Southern Company), several oil companies, and a coal company. The plaintiffs are the governing bodies of an Inupiat village in Alaska. The plaintiffs contend that the village is being destroyed by erosion allegedly caused by global warming that the plaintiffs attribute to emissions of greenhouse gases by the defendants. The plaintiffs assert claims for public and private nuisance and contend that some of the defendants have acted in concert and are therefore jointly and severally liable for the plaintiffs’ damages. The suit seeks damages for lost property values and for the cost of relocating the village, which is alleged to be $95 million to $400 million. On June 30, 2008, all defendants filed motions to dismiss this case. Southern Company believes that these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. On September 30, 2009, the U.S. District Court for the

II-254


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Northern District of California granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss the case based on lack of jurisdiction and ruled the claims were barred by the political question doctrine and by the plaintiffs’ failure to establish the standard for determining that the defendants’ conduct caused the injury alleged. On November 5, 2009, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit challenging the district court’s order dismissing the case. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Other Litigation
Common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas emissions have become more frequent, and courts have recently determined that private parties and states have standing to bring such claims. For example, on October 16, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi’s dismissal of private party claims against certain oil, coal, chemical, and utility companies alleging damages as a result of Hurricane Katrina. In reversing the dismissal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that plaintiffs have standing to assert their nuisance, trespass, and negligence claims and none of these claims are barred by the political question doctrine. The Company is not currently a party to this litigation but was named as a defendant in an amended complaint which was rendered moot in August 2007 by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi when such court dismissed the original matter. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Environmental Statutes and Regulations
General
The Company’s operations are subject to extensive regulation by state and federal environmental agencies under a variety of statutes and regulations governing environmental media, including air, water, and land resources. Applicable statutes include the Clean Air Act; the Clean Water Act; the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; the Toxic Substances Control Act; the Emergency Planning & Community Right-to-Know Act; the Endangered Species Act; and related federal and state regulations. Compliance with these environmental requirements involves significant capital and operating costs, a major portion of which is expected to be recovered through existing ratemaking provisions. Through 2008,2009, the Company had invested approximately $718 million$1.1 billion in capital projects to comply with these requirements, with annual totals of $343 million, $296 million, and $124 million for 2009, 2008, and $46 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. The Company expects that capital expenditures to assure compliance with existing and new statutes and regulations will be an additional $335$113 million, $164$195 million, and $233$194 million for 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2011,2012, respectively. The Company’s compliance strategy can be affected by changes to existing environmental laws, statutes, and regulations,regulations; the cost, availability, and existing inventory of emission allowances,emissions allowances; and the Company’s fuel mix. Environmental costs that are known and estimable at this time are included in capital expenditures discussed under FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY – “Capital Requirements and Contractual Obligations” herein.
The Florida Legislature has adopted legislation that allows a utility to petition the Florida PSC for recovery of prudent environmental compliance costs that are not being recovered through base rates or any other recovery mechanism. The legislation is discussed in Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters – Environmental Cost Recovery.” Substantially all of the costs for the Clean Air Act and other new environmental legislation discussed below are expected to be recovered through the environmental cost recovery clause.
Compliance with any new federal or state legislation or regulations related to global climate change, air quality, coal combustion byproducts, including coal ash, or other environmental and health concerns could also significantly affect the Company. Although

II-252


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
new or revised environmental legislation or regulations could affect many areas of the Company’s operations, the full impact of any such changes cannot be determined at this time.
Air Quality
Compliance with the Clean Air Act and resulting regulations has been and will continue to be a significant focus for the Company. Through 2008,2009, the Company had spent approximately $508$834 million in reducing sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions and in monitoring emissions pursuant to the Clean Air Act. Additional controls are currently beingscheduled to be installed at several plants to further reduce air emissions, maintain compliance with existing regulations, and meet new requirements.
In 2004, theThe EPA designated nonattainment areas underregulates ground level ozone through implementation of an eight-hour ozone air quality standard. No area within the Company’s service area wasis currently designated as nonattainment under the eight-hour ozone standard. Macon, Georgia, where Plant Scherer is located, was designated as nonattainment underIn March 2008, however, the eight-hour ozone standard. However, the Macon area has since been redesignated as an attainment area by the EPA, and a maintenance plan to address future exceedances of the standard have been approved. On March 12, 2008, the

II-255


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
EPA issued a final rule establishing a more stringent eight-hour ozone standard, which couldand on January 6, 2010, the EPA proposed further reductions in the standard. The EPA is expected to finalize the revised standard in August 2010 and require state implementation plans for any nonattainment areas by December 2013. The revised eight-hour ozone standard is expected to result in designation of new nonattainment areas within the Company’s service territory. The EPA is expected to publish those designations in 2010, and require state implementation plans for any nonattainment areas by 2013.
During 2005, the EPA’s annual fine particulate matter nonattainment designations became effective for several areas within Georgia. State plans for addressing the nonattainment designations for this standard were due by April 5, 2008 but have not been finalized. These state plans could require further reductions in SO2 and NOx emissions from power plants, including plants owned in part by the Company.
On December 8, 2009, the EPA also proposed revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for SO2. The EPA issuedis expected to finalize the final Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) in March 2005. This cap-and-trade rule addresses power plantrevised SO2 and NOx emissions that were found to contribute to nonattainment of the eight-hour ozone and fine particulate matter standardsstandard in downwind states. June 2010.
Twenty-eight eastern states, including the States of Florida, Georgia, and Mississippi, are subject to the requirements of the rule.Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). The rule calls for additional reductions of NOx and/or SO2 to be achieved in two phases, 2009/2010 and 2015. OnIn July 11, 2008 in response to petitions brought by certain states and regulated industries challenging particular aspects of CAIR,December 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a decision vacatingdecisions invalidating certain aspects of CAIR, in its entirety and remanding it to the EPA for further action consistent with its opinion. On December 23, 2008, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit altered its July decision in response to a rehearing petition and remanded CAIR to the EPA without vacatur, thereby leavingbut left CAIR compliance requirements in place while the EPA develops a revised rule. The StateStates of Florida, has an EPA-approved planGeorgia, and Mississippi have completed plans to implement this rule. TheseCAIR, and emissions reductions will beare being accomplished by the installation of additional emissionemissions controls at the Company’s coal-fired facilities and/or by the purchase of emissionemissions allowances. The State of Georgia has completed plansEPA is expected to implementissue a proposed CAIR and has approved a “multi-pollutant rule” that requires plant-specific emission controls on all but the smallest generating unitsreplacement rule in Georgia, to be installed according to a schedule set forth in the rule. The rule is designed to ensure reductions in emissions of SO2, NOx, and mercury in Georgia. The full impact of the court’s remand and the outcome of the EPA’s future rulemaking in response cannot be determined at this time.July 2010.
The Clean Air Visibility Rule (CAVR) (formerly called the Regional Haze Rule) was finalized in July 2005. The2005, with a goal of this rule is to restorerestoring natural visibility conditions in certain areas (primarily national parks and wilderness areas) by 2064. The rule involves (1) the application of Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) to certain sources built between 1962 and 1977, and (2) the application of any additional emissions reductions which may be deemed necessary for each designated area to achieve reasonable progress by 2018 toward the natural conditions goal. Thereafter,goal by 2018 and for each 10-year planningten-year period additional emissions reductions will be required to continue to demonstrate reasonable progress in each area during that period.thereafter. For power plants, the CAVRClean Air Visibility Rule allows states to determine that the CAIR satisfies BART requirements for SO2 and NOx. Extensive studies were performed for each of, and no additional controls beyond CAIR are anticipated to be necessary at the Company’s affected units to demonstrate that additional particulate matter controls are not necessary under BART.facilities. States have completed or are currently completing implementation plans that contain strategies for BART compliance and any other measures required to achieve the first phase of reasonable progress.
The EPA is currently developing a Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) rule for coal and oil-fired electric generating units, which will likely address numerous Hazardous Air Pollutants, including mercury. In March 2005, the EPA issued the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), a cap and trade program for the reduction of mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants. In February 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the CAMR. In a separate proceeding in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the EPA entered into a proposed consent decree that requires the EPA to issue a proposed MACT rule by March 16, 2011, and a final rule by November 16, 2011.
The impacts of the eight-hour ozone nonattainment designations,standards, the fine particulate matter nonattainment designations, and future revisions to CAIR, the CAVRSO2 standard, the Clean Air Visibility Rule, and the MACT rule for electric generating units on the Company cannot be determined at this time and will depend on the specific provisions of the final rules, resolution of any pending legal challenges, and the development and implementation of rules at the state level. However, these additional regulations could result in significant additional compliance costs that could affect future unit retirement and replacement decisions and results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.
The Company has developed and continually updates a comprehensive environmental compliance strategy to assess compliance obligations associated with the continuing and new environmental requirements discussed above. As part of this strategy, the

II-253


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Company plans to install additional SO2and NOx emissionemissions controls within the next several years to ensure continued compliance with applicable air quality requirements.
In March 2005, the EPA published the final Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), a cap-and-trade program for the reduction of mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants. The final CAMR was challenged in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The petitioners alleged that the EPA was not authorized to establish a cap-and-trade program for mercury emissions and instead the EPA must establish maximum achievable control technology standards for coal-fired electric utility steam generating units. On February 8, 2008, the court ruled in favor of the petitioners and vacated the CAMR. The Company’s overall environmental compliance strategy relies primarily on a combination of SO2 and NOx controls to reduce mercury emissions. Any significant changes in the strategy will depend on the outcome of any appeals and/or future federal and state rulemakings. Future rulemakings necessitated by the court’s decision could require emission reductions more stringent than those required by the CAMR.
Water Quality
In July 2004, the EPA published its final technology-based regulations under the Clean Water Act for the purpose of reducingto reduce impingement and entrainment of fish, shellfish, and other forms of aquatic life at existing power plant cooling water intake structures. The rules require baseline biological information and, perhaps, installation of fish protection technology near some intake structures at existing power plants. In January 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit overturned and remanded several provisions of the rule, including the use of cost-benefit analysis toin the EPA for revisions. The decision has beenrule was ultimately appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. On April 1, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the EPA could consider costs in arriving at its standards and in providing variances from those standards for existing intake structures. The EPA is now in the process of revising the regulations. While the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision may ultimately result in greater flexibility for demonstrating compliance with the standards, the full impactscope of thesethe regulations will depend on subsequent legal proceedings, further rulemaking by the EPA the results of studies and analyses performed as part of the rules’ implementation, and the actual requirements established by state regulatory agencies and, therefore, cannot be determined at this time.

II-256


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
On December 28, 2009, the EPA announced its determination that revision of the current effluent guidelines for steam electric power plants is warranted and proposed a plan to adopt such revisions by 2013. New wastewater treatment requirements are expected and may result in the installation of additional controls on certain Company facilities. The impact of revised guidelines will depend on the studies conducted in connection with the rulemaking, as well as the specific requirements of the final rule, and, therefore, cannot be determined at this time.
Environmental Remediation
The Company must comply with other environmental laws and regulations that cover the handling and disposal of waste and releases of hazardous substances. Under these various laws and regulations, the Company could incur substantial costs to clean up properties. The Company conducts studies to determine the extent of any required cleanup and has recognized in its financial statements the costs to clean up known sites. Included in this amount are costs associated with remediation of the Company’s substation sites. These projects have been approved by the Florida PSC for recovery through the environmental cost recovery clause; therefore, there is no impact to the Company’s net income as a result of these liabilities. The Company may be liable for some or all required cleanup costs for additional sites that may require environmental remediation. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Environmental Matters – Environmental Remediation” for additional information.
Global Climate IssuesCoal Combustion Byproducts
Federal legislative proposals that would impose mandatory requirements relatedThe EPA is currently evaluating whether additional regulation of coal combustion byproducts is merited under federal solid and hazardous waste laws. The EPA has collected information from the electric utility industry on surface impoundment safety and conducted on-site inspections at three Southern Company system facilities as part of its evaluation. The Company has a routine and robust inspection program in place to greenhouse gas emissions and renewable energy standards continueensure the integrity of its coal ash surface impoundments. The EPA is expected to be strongly consideredissue a proposal regarding additional regulation of coal combustion byproducts in Congress, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has been identified as a high priority by the current Administration.early 2010. The ultimate outcomeimpact of these proposalsadditional regulations on the Company will depend on the specific provisions of the final rule and cannot be determined at this time; however, mandatory restrictionstime. However, additional regulation of coal combustion byproducts could have a significant impact on the Company’s greenhouse gas emissionsmanagement, beneficial use, and disposal of such byproducts and could result in significant additional compliance costs that could affect future unit retirement and replacement decisions and results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.
Global Climate Issues
Federal legislative proposals that would impose mandatory requirements related to greenhouse gas emissions, renewable energy standards, and energy efficiency standards continue to be considered in Congress, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has been identified as a high priority by the current Administration. On June 26, 2009, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES), which would impose mandatory greenhouse gas restrictions through implementation of a cap and trade program, a renewable energy standard, and other measures, was passed by the House of Representatives. ACES would require reductions of greenhouse gas emissions on a national basis to a level that is 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, 42% below 2005 levels by 2030, and 83% below 2005 levels by 2050. In addition, ACES would provide for renewable energy standards of 6% by 2012 and 20% by 2020. Similar legislation is being considered by the Senate. The financial and operational impact of such legislation, if enacted, will depend on a variety of factors. These factors include the specific greenhouse gas emissions limits or renewable energy requirements, the timing of implementation of these limits or requirements, the level of emissions allowances allocated and the level that must be purchased, the purchase price of emissions allowances, the development and commercial availability of technologies for renewable energy and for the reduction of emissions, the degree to which offsets may be used for compliance, provisions for cost containment (if any), the impact on coal and natural gas prices, and cost recovery through regulated rates. There can be no assurance that any legislation will be enacted or as to the ultimate form of any legislation. Additional or alternative legislation may be adopted as well.
In April 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the EPA has authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles. On December 15, 2009, the EPA published a final determination, which became effective on January 14, 2010, that certain greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles endanger public health and welfare due to climate change. On September 28, 2009, the EPA published a proposed rule regulating greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles under the Clean Air Act. The EPA has stated that once this rule is currently developing its responseeffective, it will cause carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to this decision. Regulatory decisions that will follow from this response may have implicationsbecome regulated pollutants under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) preconstruction permit program and the Title V operating permit program, which both apply to power plants. As a result, the construction of new facilities or the major modification of existing facilities could trigger the requirement for both newa PSD permit and existingthe installation of the best available control technology for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. The EPA also published a proposed rule governing how these programs would be applied to stationary sources, such asincluding power plants.plants, on October 27, 2009. The EPA has stated that it expects to finalize these proposed rules in March

II-257


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
2010. The ultimate outcome of the endangerment finding and these rulemaking activitiesproposed rules cannot be determined at this time; however, as withtime and will depend on additional regulatory action and any legal challenges.
International climate change negotiations under the current legislative proposals,United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change also continue. A nonbinding agreement was announced during the most recent round of negotiations in December 2009 that included a pledge from both developed and developing countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. The outcome and impact of the international negotiations cannot be determined at this time.
Although the outcome of federal, state, or international initiatives cannot be determined at this time, mandatory restrictions on the Company’s greenhouse gas emissions couldor requirements relating to renewable energy or energy efficiency on the federal or state level are likely to result in significant additional compliance costs, thatincluding significant capital expenditures. These costs could affect future unit retirement and replacement decisions, and could result in the retirement of a significant number of coal-fired generating units. See Item 1 – BUSINESS – “Rate Matters – Integrated Resource Planning” for additional information. Also, additional compliance costs and costs related to unit retirements could affect results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates. Further, higher costs that are recovered through regulated rates could contribute to reduced demand for electricity, which could negatively impact results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition.
In addition, some states are considering or have undertaken actions to regulate and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. On June 25, 2008, Florida’s Governor signed comprehensive energy-related legislation that includes authorization for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to adopt rules for a cap-and-trade regulatory program to address greenhouse gastotal carbon dioxide emissions from the fossil fuel-fired electric utilities, conditioned upon their ratificationgenerating units owned by the legislature no sooner than the 2010 legislative session.  This legislation also authorizes the Florida PSCCompany were approximately 14 million metric tons. The preliminary estimate of carbon dioxide emissions from these units in 2009 is approximately 11 million metric tons. The level of carbon dioxide emissions from year to adopt a renewable portfolio standard for public utilities, subject to legislative ratification. The impact of

II-254


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
this and any similar legislationyear will be dependent on the Company will depend onlevel of generation and mix of fuel sources, which is determined primarily by demand, the future development, adoption, legislative ratification, implementation, and potential legal challenges to rules governing greenhouse gas emissions and mandates regarding the useunit cost of renewable energy,fuel consumed, and the ultimate outcome cannot be determined at this time.
International climate change negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change also continue. Current efforts focus on a potential successor to the Kyoto Protocol for the post 2012 timeframe, with a conclusion to this roundavailability of negotiations targeted for the end of 2009. The outcome and impact of the international negotiations cannot be determined at this time.generating units.
The Company continues to evaluate its future energy and emissionemissions profiles and is participating in voluntary programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to help develop and advance technology to reduce emissions.
FERCPSC Matters
Market-Based Rate AuthorityGeneral
The Company has authorization from the FERCCompany’s rates and charges for service to sell power to non-affiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices. Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based contract with an affiliate.
In December 2004, the FERC initiated a proceeding to assess Southern Company’s generation dominance within its retail service territory. The ability to charge market-based rates in other markets is not an issue in the proceeding. Any new market-based rate sales by the Company in Southern Company’s retail service territory entered into during a 15-month refund period that ended in May 2006 could becustomers are subject to refund tothe regulatory oversight of the Florida PSC. The Company’s rates are a cost-based rate level.
In November 2007, the presiding administrative law judge issued an initial decision regarding the methodology to be used in the generation dominance tests. The proceedings are ongoing. The ultimate outcomecombination of this generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined, but an adverse decision by the FERC in a final order could require the Company to charge cost-based rates for certain wholesale sales in the Southern Company retail service territory, which may be lower than negotiated market-basedbase rates and could also result in total refundsseveral separate cost recovery clauses for specific categories of up to $0.8 million, plus interest. The Company believes that there is no meritorious basis for an adverse decision in this proceedingcosts. These separate cost recovery clauses address such items as fuel and is vigorously defending itself in this matter.purchased energy costs, purchased power capacity costs, energy conservation, and demand side management programs, and the costs of compliance with environmental laws and regulations. Costs not addressed through one of the specific cost recovery clauses are recovered through the Company’s base rates.
In June 2007,On November 2, 2009, the FERC issued its final rule in Order No. 697 regarding market-basedFlorida PSC approved the Company’s annual rate authority. The FERC generally retained its current market-based rate standards. Responding to a number of requests for rehearing,its purchased power capacity, energy conservation, and environmental compliance cost recovery factors for 2010. On December 1, 2009, the FERC issued Order No. 697-A on April 21, 2008Florida PSC approved the Company’s annual rate request for its 2010 fuel cost recovery factor, which includes both fuel and Order No. 697-B on December 12, 2008. These orders largely affirmed the FERC’s prior revision and codificationpurchased energy cost. The net effect of the regulations governing market-based rates for public utilities. In accordance with the orders, Southern Company submittedapproved changes to the FERC an updated market power analysisCompany’s cost recovery factors for 2010 is a 3.9% rate increase for residential customers using 1,000 KWHs per month. Revenues for all cost recovery clauses, as recorded on September 2, 2008 related to its continued market-based rate authority. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
On October 17, 2008, Southern Company filed with the FERC a revised market-based rate (MBR) tarifffinancial statements, are adjusted for differences in actual recoverable costs and a new cost-based rate (CBR) tariff.   The revised MBR tariff provides for a “must offer” energy auction whereby Southern Company, offers all of its available energy for saleamounts billed in a day-ahead auctioncurrent regulated rates. Accordingly, changing the billing factor has no significant effect on the Company’s revenues or net income, but does impact annual cash flow. See Notes 1 and an hour-ahead auction with reserve prices not to exceed the CBR tariff price, after considering Southern Company’s native load requirements, reliability obligations, and sales commitments to third parties. All sales under the energy auction would be at market clearing prices established under the auction rules. The new CBR tariff provides for a cost-based price for wholesale sales of less than a year. On December 18, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the MBR tariff subject to certain revisions3 to the auction proposal. On January 21, 2009, Southern Company made a compliance filing that accepted all the conditions of the MBR tariff order. When this order becomes final, Southern Company will have 30 days to implement the wholesale auction. On December 31, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the CBR tariff subject to providing additional information concerning one aspect of the tariff. On January 30, 2009, Southern Company filed a response addressing the FERC inquiry to the CBR tariff order. Implementation of the energy auction in accordance with the MBR tariff order is expected to adequately mitigate going forward any presumption of market power that Southern Company may have in the Southern Company retail service territory. The timing of when the FERC may issue the final orders on the MBRfinancial statements under “Revenues” and CBR tariffs and the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.

II-255


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
PSC“Retail Regulatory Matters – Fuel Cost Recovery,” respectively.
Fuel Cost Recovery
The Company petitions for fuel cost recovery rates to be approved by the Florida PSC on an annual basis. At December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, the under recovered balance was $2.4 million and $96.7 million, and $56.6 million, respectively,respectively. The change in 2009 was primarily due to lower non-territorial sales, increased costs for coal,an increase in the 2009 fuel cost recovery factors and resulting revenue collected in the period and a higher percentage of natural gas fired generation.gas-fired generation which cost less than projected. The Company continuously monitors the over or under recovered fuel cost balance in light of the inherent variability in fuel costs. If the projected fuel cost over or under recovery exceeds 10% of the projected fuel revenue applicable for the period, the Company is required to notify the Florida PSC and indicate if an adjustment to the fuel cost recovery factor is being requested.

II-258


On July 29, 2008, the
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Purchased Power Capacity Recovery
The Florida PSC approved a request by the Company to increase the fuel cost recovery factor effective with billings beginning September 2008. The remaining portion of the projected under recovered balance is expected to be recovered in 2009. On September 2, 2008, the Company filed its 2009 projected fuel cost recovery filing with the Florida PSC which includes the fuel factors proposed for January 2009 through December 2009. On October 13, 2008, the Company notified the Florida PSC that the updated projected fuel cost under recovery balance at year-end exceeds the 10% threshold, but no adjustment to the fuel factor was requested.
On November 6, 2008, the Florida PSC approved an increase of approximately 12.9% in the fuel factor for retail customers, effective with billings beginning January 2009. The fuel factors are intended to allowallows the Company to recover its projectedcosts for capacity purchased from other power producers under power purchase agreements (PPAs) through a separate cost recovery component or factor in the Company’s retail energy rates. Like the other specific cost recovery factors included in the Company’s retail energy rates, the rates for purchased capacity are set annually on a calendar year basis. When the Company enters into a new PPA, it is reviewed and approved by the Florida PSC for cost recovery purposes. As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company had an over recovered purchased power capacity balance of approximately $1.5 million and $0.3 million, respectively, which is included in other regulatory liabilities, current in the balance sheets.
In March 2009, the Company entered into a PPA (the Agreement) with Shell Energy North America (US), L.P. (Shell) conditioned on subsequent review and approval of the Company’s participation by the Florida PSC. The Florida PSC approved the Agreement through an order that became final in October 2009. As a result, the Agreement became effective on November 1, 2009. The Agreement will terminate on May 24, 2023, unless terminated earlier in accordance with its terms. Under the terms of the Agreement, the Company will be entitled to all of the capacity and energy from an approximately 885 MW combined cycle power plant (the Plant) located in Autauga County, Alabama that is owned and operated by Tenaska Alabama II Partners, L.P. (Tenaska). Shell is entitled to all of the capacity and energy from the Plant under a 20-year Energy Conversion Agreement between Shell and Tenaska that expires on May 24, 2023. Payments under the Agreement will be material. However, these costs have been approved by the Florida PSC for recovery through the Company’s fuel clause and purchased power costs as well as the 2008 under recovered amounts in 2009. Fuel cost recovery revenues, as recorded on the financial statements, are adjusted for differences in actual recoverable costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Accordingly, changing the billing factor hascapacity clause; therefore, no significant effectmaterial impact is expected on the Company’s revenues or net income, but does impact annual cash flow.income. See Notes 1FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY – “Capital Requirements and 3Contractual Obligations” herein and Note 7 to the financial statements under “Revenues”“Fuel and “Retail Regulatory Matters — Fuel Cost Recovery,” respectively.Purchased Power Commitments” for additional information.
Environmental Cost Recovery
In August 2007, the Florida PSC voted to approve a stipulation among the Company, the Office of Public Counsel, and the Florida Industrial Power Users Group regarding the Company’s plan for complying with certain federal and state regulations addressing air quality. The Company’s environmental compliance plan as filed in March 2007 contemplated implementation of specific projects identified in the plan from 2007 through 2018. The stipulation covers all elements of the current plan that are scheduled to be implemented in the 2007 through 2011 timeframe. On September 18, 2008,April 1, 2009, the Company filed an update to the plan, which was approved by the Florida PSC on November 4, 2008.2, 2009. The Florida PSC acknowledged that the costs associated with the Company’s CAIR/CAMR/CAVRCAIR and Clean Air Visibility Rule compliance planplans are clearly eligible for recovery through the environmental cost recovery clause. Annually, the Company seeks recovery of projected costs including any true-up amounts from prior periods. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the over recovered environmental balance was approximately $11.7 million and $71 thousand, respectively, which is included in other regulatory liabilities, current in the balance sheets. See FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY “Capital Requirements and Contractual Obligations” herein, Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters - Environmental Cost Recovery,” and Note 7 to the financial statements under “Construction Program” for additional information.
Storm Damage Cost Recovery
Under authority granted by the Florida PSC, the Company maintains a reserve for property damage to cover the cost of uninsured damages from major storms to its transmission and distribution facilities, generation facilities, and other property. Funds collected by the Company related to the storm-recovery costs associated with previous hurricanes had been fully recovered by August 31, 2008. Funds collected by the Company through its storm-recovery surcharge are now being credited to the property reserve and will continue through June 2009 when the approved surcharge ends. As of December 31, 2008, the balance in the Company’s property damage reserve totaled approximately $9.8 million, which is included in deferred liabilities in the balance sheets.
See Notes 1 and 3 to the financial statements under “Property Damage Reserve” and “Retail Regulatory Matters – Storm Damage Cost Recovery,” respectively, for additional information.

II-256


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Income Tax Matters
Legislation
On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). Major tax incentives in the ARRA include an extension of bonus depreciation and multiple renewable energy incentives. These incentives, which could have a significant impact on the Company’s future cash flow and net income. Additionally,income of the Company. The Company’s cash flow reduction to 2009 tax payments as a result of the bonus depreciation provisions of the ARRA includes programswas approximately $19 million. On December 8, 2009, President Obama announced proposals to accelerate job growth that include an extension of the bonus depreciation provision for renewable energy,the ARRA for 2010, which could have a significant impact on the future cash flow and net income of the Company.
On October 27, 2009, Southern Company and its subsidiaries received notice that an award of $165 million had been granted, of which $15.5 million relates to the Company, under the ARRA grant application for transmission and smart grid enhancement, fossil energydistribution automation and research,modernization projects pending final negotiations. The Company continues to assess the other financial implications of the ARRA.
The U.S. House of Representatives and energy efficiency and conservation. the U.S. Senate have passed separate bills related to healthcare reform. Both bills include a provision that would make Medicare Part D subsidy reimbursements taxable. If enacted into law, this provision could have a significant negative impact on the Company’s net income. See Note 2 to the financial statements under “Other Postretirement Benefits” for additional information.
The ultimate impact of these matters cannot be determined at this time.

II-259


Internal Revenue Code Section 199 Domestic Production DeductionMANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Income Tax Matters
The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 created a tax deduction for a portion of income attributable to U.S. production activities as defined in the Section 199 (production activities deduction) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Internal Revenue Code).amended. The deduction is equal to a stated percentage of qualified production activities net income. The percentage is phased in over the years 2005 through 2010 with a 3% rate applicable to the years 2005 and 2006, a 6% rate applicable for the years 2007 through 2009, and a 9% rate thereafter. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has not clearly defined a methodology for calculating this deduction. However, Southern Company has agreed with the IRS on a calculation methodology and signed a closing agreement on December 11, 2008. Therefore, the Company reversed the unrecognized tax benefit and adjusted the deduction to conform to the agreement. The net impact of the reversal of the unrecognized tax benefits combined with the application of the new methodology had no material effect on the Company’s financial statements. See Note 5 to the financial statements under “Effective Tax Rate” for additional information.
Other Matters
In 2004, Georgia Power and the Company entered into power purchase agreements (PPAs) with Florida Power & Light Company (FP&L) and Progress Energy Florida. Under the agreements, Georgia Power and the Company will provide FP&L and Progress Energy Florida with 165 megawatts and 74 megawatts, respectively, of capacity annually from the jointly owned Plant Scherer Unit 3 for the period from June 2010 through December 2015. The contracts provide for fixed capacity payments and variable energy payments based on actual energy delivered. The Florida PSC approved the contracts in 2005.
Also in 2004, Georgia Power and the Company entered into a PPA with Flint Electric Membership Corporation. Under the agreement, Georgia Power and the Company will provide Flint Electric Membership Corporation with 75 megawatts of capacity annually from the jointly owned Plant Scherer Unit 3 for the period from June 2010 through December 2019. The contract provides for fixed capacity payments and variable energy payments based on actual energy delivered.
The Company is involved in various other matters being litigated and regulatory matters that could affect future earnings. In addition, the Company is subject to certain claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company’s business activities are subject to extensive governmental regulation related to public health and the environment.environment such as regulation of air emissions and water discharges. Litigation over environmental issues and claims of various types, including property damage, personal injury, common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of environmental requirements such as opacity and air and water quality standards, has increased generally throughout the United States. In particular, personal injury and other claims for damages caused by alleged exposure to hazardous materials, and common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas and other emissions, have become more frequent. The ultimate outcome of such pending or potential litigation against the Company cannot be predicted at this time; however, for current proceedings not specifically reported herein, management does not anticipate that the liabilities, if any, arising from such current proceedings would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial statements. See Note 3 to the financial statements for information regarding material issues.

II-257


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The Company prepares its financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Significant accounting policies are described in Note 1 to the financial statements. In the application of these policies, certain estimates are made that may have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations and related disclosures. Different assumptions and measurements could produce estimates that are significantly different from those recorded in the financial statements. Senior management has reviewed and discussed critical accounting policies and estimates described below with the Audit Committee of Southern Company’s Board of Directors.
Electric Utility Regulation
The Company is subject to retail regulation by the Florida PSC and wholesale regulation by the FERC. These regulatory agencies set the rates the Company is permitted to charge customers based on allowable costs. As a result, the Company applies Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Statement No. 71, “Accounting for the Effects of Certain Types of Regulation” (SFAS No. 71),accounting standards which requiresrequire the financial statements to reflect the effects of rate regulation. Through the ratemaking process, the regulators may require the inclusion of costs or revenues in periods different than when they would be recognized by a non-regulated company. This treatment may result in the deferral of expenses and the recording of related regulatory assets based on anticipated future recovery through rates or the deferral of gains or creation of liabilities and the recording of related regulatory liabilities. The application of SFAS No. 71the accounting standards has a further effect on the Company’s financial statements as a result of the estimates of allowable costs used in the ratemaking process. These estimates may differ from those actually incurred by the Company; therefore, the accounting estimates inherent in specific costs such as depreciation and pension and postretirement benefits have less of a direct impact on the Company’s results of operations than they would on a non-regulated company.
As reflected in Note 1 to the financial statements, significant regulatory assets and liabilities have been recorded. Management reviews the ultimate recoverability of these regulatory assets and liabilities based on applicable regulatory guidelines and accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. However, adverse legislative, judicial, or regulatory actions could materially impact the amounts of such regulatory assets and liabilities and could adversely impact the Company’s financial statements.
Contingent Obligations
The Company is subject to a number of federal and state laws and regulations, as well as other factors and conditions that potentially subject it to environmental, litigation, income tax, and other risks. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL herein and Note 3 to the financial statements for more information regarding certain of these contingencies. The Company periodically evaluates its exposure

II-260


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
to such risks and, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), records reserves for those matters where a non-tax-related loss is considered probable and reasonably estimable and records a tax asset or liability if it is more likely than not that a tax position will be sustained. The adequacy of reserves can be significantly affected by external events or conditions that can be unpredictable; thus, the ultimate outcome of such matters could materially affect the Company’s financial statements. These events or conditions include the following:
Changes in existing state or federal regulation by governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, control of toxic substances, hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters.
Changes in existing income tax regulations or changes in IRS or state revenue department interpretations of existing regulations.
Identification of additional sites that require environmental remediation or the filing of other complaints in which the Company may be asserted to be a potentially responsible party.
Identification and evaluation of other potential lawsuits or complaints in which the Company may be named as a defendant.
Resolution or progression of new or existing matters through the legislative process, the court systems, the IRS, the FERC, or the EPA.

II-258


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Changes in existing state or federal regulation by governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, coal combustion byproducts, including coal ash, control of toxic substances, hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters.
Changes in existing income tax regulations or changes in IRS or state revenue department interpretations of existing regulations.
Identification of additional sites that require environmental remediation or the filing of other complaints in which the Company may be asserted to be a potentially responsible party.
Identification and evaluation of other potential lawsuits or complaints in which the Company may be named as a defendant.
Resolution or progression of new or existing matters through the legislative process, the court systems, the IRS, state revenue departments, the FERC, or the EPA.
Unbilled Revenues
Revenues related to the retail sale of electricity are recorded when electricity is delivered to customers. However, the determination of KWH sales to individual customers is based on the reading of their meters, which is performed on a systematic basis throughout the month. At the end of each month, amounts of electricity delivered to customers, but not yet metered and billed, are estimated. Components of the unbilled revenue estimates include total KWH territorial supply, total KWH billed, estimated total electricity lost in delivery, and customer usage. These components can fluctuate as a result of a number of factors including weather, generation patterns, and power delivery volume and other operational constraints. These factors can be unpredictable and can vary from historical trends. As a result, the overall estimate of unbilled revenues could be significantly affected, which could have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations.
Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits
The Company’s calculation of pension and other postretirement benefits expense is dependent on a number of assumptions. These assumptions include discount rates, health care cost trend rates, expected long-term return on plan assets, mortality rates, expected salary and wage increases, and other factors. Components of pension and other postretirement benefits expense include interest and service cost on the pension and other postretirement benefit plans, expected return on plan assets and amortization of certain unrecognized costs and obligations. Actual results that differ from the assumptions utilized are accumulated and amortized over future periods and, therefore, generally affect recognized expense and the recorded obligation in future periods. While the Company believes that the assumptions used are appropriate, differences in actual experience or significant changes in assumptions would affect its pension and other postretirement benefits costs and obligations.
Key elements in determining the Company’s pension and other postretirement benefit expense in accordance with GAAP are the expected long-term return on plan assets and the discount rate used to measure the benefit plan obligations and the periodic benefit plan expense for future periods. The expected long-term return on postretirement benefit plan assets is based on the Company’s investment strategy, historical experience, and expectations for long-term rates of return that considers external actuarial advice. The Company determines the long-term return on plan assets by applying the long-term rate of expected returns on various asset classes to the Company’s target asset allocation. The Company discounts the future cash flows related to its postretirement benefit plans using a single-point discount rate developed from the weighted average of market-observed yields for high quality fixed income securities with maturities that correspond to expected benefit payments.
A 25 basis point change in any significant assumption would result in a $0.8 million or less change in total benefit expense and a $12 million or less change in projected obligations.

II-261


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
New Accounting Standards
Variable Interest Entities
In June 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued new guidance on the consolidation of variable interest entities, which replaces the quantitative-based risks and rewards calculation for determining whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary in a variable interest entity with an approach that is primarily qualitative, requires ongoing assessments of whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity, and requires additional disclosures about an enterprise’s involvement in variable interest entities. The Company adopted this new guidance effective January 1, 2010, with no material impact on its financial statements.
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY
Overview
The Company’s financial condition remained stable at December 31, 2008.2009. Throughout the recent turmoil in the financial markets, the Company has maintained adequate access to capital without drawing on any of its bank credit arrangements used to support its commercial paper programsprogram and variable rate pollution control revenue bonds. The Company has continued to issue commercial paper at reasonable rates. The Company intends to continue to monitor its access to short-term and long-term capital markets as well as its bank credit arrangements to meet future capital and liquidity needs. No material changes in bank credit arrangements have occurred, although marketMarket rates for committed credit have increased in 2009, and the Company may continue to be subject to higher costs as its existing facilities are replaced or renewed. The Company’s interest costTotal committed credit fees for short-term debt has decreased as market short-term interest rates have declined. The ultimate impact on future financing costs as a resultthe Company average less than3/4 of the financial turmoil cannot be determined at this time. The Company experienced no material counterparty credit losses as a result of the turmoil in the financial markets.1% per year. See “Sources of Capital” and “Financing Activities” herein for additional information.
The Company’s investments in pension trust funds declinedremained stable in value as of December 31, 2008.2009. The Company expects that the earliest that cash may have to be contributed to the pension trust fund is 20112012 and such contribution could be significant; however,significant. The projections of the amount vary significantly depending on interpretations of and decisions related to federal legislation passed during 2008 as well as other key variables including future trust fund performance and cannot be determined at this time.
Net cash flowprovided from operating activities totaled $194.2 million, $147.9 million, and $217.0 million for 2009, 2008, and $143.42007, respectively. The $46.3 million for 2008, 2007,increase in net cash provided from operating activities in 2009 was primarily due to a $134.5 million reduction in accounts receivable related to fuel cost, partially offset by a $40.5 million decrease in deferred income taxes and 2006, respectively.a $38.4 million increase in fuel inventory. The $69.1 million decrease in net cash flowsprovided from operating activities in 2008 was due primarily to a $61.0 million increase in cash used for the under recovered regulatory clause related to fuel. The $73.6 million increase in net cash flowsprovided from operating activities in 2007 was due primarily to increased cash inflows for fuel cost recovery. The $9.3 million decrease in net cash flows from operating activities in 2006 was due primarily to increased payments related to income taxes and fuel.
Net cash flow used byfor investing activities totaled $468.4 million, $348.7 million, and $239.3 million for 2009, 2008, and $164.4 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. The increases in cash flows used byfor investing activities were primarily due to gross property additions to utility plant of $450.4 million, $390.7 million, and $239.3 million for 2009, 2008, and $147.1 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Funds for the Company’s property additions were provided by operating activities, capital contributions, and other financing activities.
Net cash flowprovided from financing activities totaled $279.4 million, $198.8 million, and $20.2 million for 2009, 2008, and $24.72007, respectively. The $80.6 million for 2008, 2007,increase in net cash provided from financing activities in 2009 was due primarily to $258.4 million in debt issuances and 2006, respectively.cash raised from a common stock sale, partially offset by a $157.0 million decrease in notes payable. The $178.6 million increase in net cash flowsprovided from financing activities in 2008 was due primarily to the issuance of $110 million in long-term debt and $50 million in short-term debt, and a $49.1 million change in commercial paper cash flows in 2008. The increase was partially offset by the issuance of $85 million in senior notes in 2007. The $4.5 million decrease in net cash flowsprovided from financing activities in 2007 was due primarily to a $105.6 million change in commercial paper cash flows and a $25.0 million decrease in senior note proceeds. These decreases were partially offset by the issuance of $80 million in common stock and $45 million in preference stock in 2007. The $77.4 million
Significant balance sheet changes in 2009 include an increase in net cash flows from financing activities in 2006 was due primarily to a $50.0 million increase in senior note proceeds and the redemption of $100.0$374.1 million in long-term debt in 2005. These increases were partially offset bytotal property, plant, and equipment, primarily related to environmental control projects; the issuance of $55.0$140.0 million in preferencesenior notes; the issuance of common stock in 2005 andto Southern Company for $135.0 million; the redemptionissuance of $30.9$130.4 million of long-term debt payablepollution control revenue bonds, with a related restricted cash balance of $6.3 million; an increase in fossil fuel stock of $75.5 million; an increase in customer accounts receivable and unbilled revenues of $6.4 million; and a $94.4 million decrease in under recovered regulatory clause revenues primarily related to affiliated trusts in 2006. See the statements of cash flows for additional information.fuel.

II-259II-262


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Significant balance sheet changes in 2008 included a net increase of $308.2 million in property, plant, and equipment, primarily related to environmental control projects, the issuance of $110 million in long-term debt and $50 million in short-term debt, a $40.1 million increase in under recovered regulatory clause revenues related to fuel, and a $31.0 million change in energy-related derivative contracts. Other significant balance sheet changes which are primarily attributable to the decline in market value of the Company’s pension trust fund include a decrease of $107.2 million in prepaid pension costs, an increase of $73.3 million in other deferred regulatory assets, and a decrease of $54.1 million in other deferred regulatory liabilities.
The Company’s ratio of common equity to total capitalization, including short-term debt, was 43.4% in 2009, 42.9% in 2008, and 45.3% in 2007, and 42.1% in 2006.2007. See Note 6 to the financial statements for additional information.
The Company has received investment grade credit ratings from the major rating agencies with respect to its debt and preference stock. See “SELECTEDSELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA”DATA and “Credit Rating Risk” herein for additional information regarding the Company’s security ratings.
Sources of Capital
The Company plans to obtain the funds required for construction and other purposes from sources similar to those used in the past, which were primarily from operating cash flows, securitiessecurity issuances, term loans, and short-term indebtedness. However, the type and timing of any future financings, if needed, will depend on market conditions, regulatory approval, and other factors.
Security issuances are subject to regulatory approval by the Florida PSC pursuant to its rules and regulations. Additionally, with respect to the public offering of securities, the Company files registration statements with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (1933 Act). The amounts of securities authorized by the Florida PSC, as well as the amounts, if any, registered under the 1933 Act, are continuously monitored and appropriate filings are made to ensure flexibility in the capital markets.
The Company obtains financing separately without credit support from any affiliate. See Note 6 to the financial statements under “Bank Credit Arrangements” for additional information. The Southern Company system does not maintain a centralized cash or money pool. Therefore, funds of the Company are not commingled with funds of any other company.
The Company’s current liabilities frequently exceed current assets because of the continued use of short-term debt as a funding source to meet cash needs which can fluctuate significantly due to the seasonality of the business. To meet short-term cash needs and contingencies, the Company has various internal and external sources of liquidity. At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had approximately $3.4$9 million of cash and cash equivalents, along with $120$220 million of unused committed lines of credit with banks to meet its short-term cash needs. Of theseThese bank credit arrangements $120 million will expire in 20092010 and $90$70 million contain provisions allowing one-year term loans executable at expiration. Subsequent to December 31, 2008, the Company obtained an additional $20 million of committed credit, which expires in 2009. The Company plans to renew these lines of credit during 20092010 prior to their expiration. In addition, the Company has substantial cash flow from operating activities and access to the capital markets, including a commercial paper program, to meet liquidity needs. See Note 6 to the financial statements under “Bank Credit Arrangements” for additional information.
The Company may also meet short-term cash needs through a Southern Company subsidiary organized to issue and sell commercial paper and extendible commercial notes at the request and for the benefit of the Company and the other traditional operating companies. Proceeds from such issuances for the benefit of the Company are loaned directly to the Company and are not commingled with proceeds from such issuances for the benefit of any other traditional operating company. ThereThe obligations of each company under these arrangements are several; there is no cross affiliate credit support. At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had $89.9$88.9 million of commercial paper outstanding. In addition,At December 31, 2009, the Company also had a $50 million short-term bank loan outstanding and $8.3$1.4 million in notes payable outstanding related to other energy services contracts.
Financing Activities
In 2008,2009, the Company borrowed $110issued $140 million under a three-year term loan agreement and $50 million under a short-term loan agreement. Proceeds were used to repay a portion of the Company’s short-term indebtedness and for other general corporate purposes, including Gulf Power’s continuous construction activities. Interest rate hedges of $80 million were settled related to issuance of senior debt at a loss of approximately $5 million.

II-260


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
In the firstnotes and second quarters of 2008, the Company converted its entire $141 million ofincurred obligations related to auction ratethe issuance of $130.4 million of pollution control revenue bonds from auction rate modes to other interest rate modes. Approximately $75 million of the auction rate pollution control revenue bonds were converted to fixed interest rate modes and approximately $66 million were converted to variable rate modes.
During the fourth quarter of 2008, the Company converted $66 million in obligations related to variable rate pollution control revenue bonds to a fixed interest rate mode, eliminating the committed credit backup requirement for these bonds. Of this amount, the Company purchased from investors approximately $37 million of variable rate pollution control revenue bonds that were subject to mandatory tender, all of which were subsequently remarketed at a fixed rate.
On January 22, 2009,In addition, the Company issued to Southern Company 1,350,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, without par value, and realized proceeds of $135 million. On January 25, 2010, the Company issued to Southern Company 500,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, without par value, and realized proceeds of $50 million. The proceeds were used to repay a portion of the Company’s short-term debt, to fund construction of certain environmental projects, and for other general corporate purposes.purposes, including the Company’s continuous construction program.
The Company also entered into forward starting interest rate swaps during 2009 totaling $100 million to mitigate exposure to interest rate changes related to anticipated debt issuances. The swaps have been designated as cash flow hedges.
In addition to any financings that may be necessary to meet capital requirements, contractual obligations, and storm-recovery, the Company plans to continue, when economically feasible, a program to retire higher-cost securities and replace these obligations with lower-cost capital if market conditions permit.

II-263


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Credit Rating Risk
The Company does not have any credit arrangements that would require material changes in payment schedules or terminations as a result of a credit rating downgrade. There are certain contracts that could require collateral, but not accelerated payment, in the event of a credit rating change to BBB- and/or Baa3 or below. These contracts are for physical electricity purchases and sales, fuel transportation and storage, emissions allowances, and energy price risk management. At December 31, 2008,2009, the maximum potential collateral requirements under these contracts at a BBB- and/or Baa3 rating were approximately $49$130 million. At December 31, 2008,2009, the maximum potential collateral requirements under these contracts at a rating below BBB- and/or Baa3 were approximately $205$547 million. Included in these amounts are certain agreements that could require collateral in the event that one or more Southern Company system power pool participants has a credit rating change to below investment grade. Generally, collateral may be provided by a Southern Company guaranty, letter of credit, or cash. Additionally, any credit rating downgrade could impact the Company’s ability to access capital markets, particularly the short-term debt market.
On September 2, 2009, Moody’s Investors Service (Moody’s) affirmed the credit ratings of the Company’s senior unsecured notes and commercial paper of A2/P-1, respectively, and revised the rating outlook to negative. On September 4, 2009, Fitch Ratings, Inc. affirmed the Company’s senior unsecured notes and commercial paper ratings of A/F1, respectively, and maintained a stable rating outlook for the Company. On October 6, 2009, Standard and Poor’s Rating Services, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. (S&P) affirmed the credit ratings of the Company’s senior unsecured notes and its short-term credit rating of A/A-1, respectively, and maintained its stable rating outlook.
Market Price Risk
The Company’s market risk exposures relative to interest rate changes have not changed materially compared with the December 31, 2007 reporting period. Since a significant portion of outstanding indebtedness is at fixed rates, the Company is not aware of any facts or circumstances that would significantly affect exposures on existing indebtedness in the near term. However, the impact on future financing costs cannot now be determined.
Due to cost-based rate regulation, the Company has limited exposure to market volatility in interest rates, commodity fuel prices, and prices of electricity. To manage the volatility attributable to these exposures, the Company nets the exposures, where possible, to take advantage of natural offsets and enters into various derivative transactions for the remaining exposures pursuant to the Company’s policies in areas such as counterparty exposure and risk management practices. Company policy is that derivatives are to be used primarily for hedging purposes and mandates strict adherence to all applicable risk management policies. Derivative positions are monitored using techniques including but not limited to market valuation, value at risk, stress testing, and sensitivity analysis.
To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in electricity prices, the Company enters into fixed-price contracts for the purchase and sale of electricity through the wholesale electricity market and, to a lesser extent, into financial hedge contracts for natural gas purchases. The Company has implemented a fuel-hedging program per the guidelines of the Florida PSC.
The weighted average interest rate on $114$319 million variable rate long-term debt at January 1, 20092010 was 1.62%0.45%. If the Company sustained a 100 basis point change in interest rates for all variable rate long-term debt, the change would affect annualized interest expense by approximately $1$3 million at January 1, 2009.2010. See NotesNote 1 and 6 to the financial statements under “Financial Instruments” and Note 10 to the financial statements for additional information.

II-261


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The changes in fair value of energy-related derivative contracts were as follows at December 31:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 Changes Changes Changes Changes
 Fair Value Fair Value
 (in millions) (in thousands)
Contracts outstanding at the beginning of the period, assets (liabilities), net  $(0.2) $(7.1) $(31,161) $(202)
Contracts realized or settled   (8.0) 6.6  41,683  (7,960)
Current period changes(a)
  (23.0) 0.3   (24,209)  (22,999)
Contracts outstanding at the end of the period, assets (liabilities), net  $(31.2) $(0.2) $(13,687) $(31,161)
(a) Current period changes also include the changes in fair value of new contracts entered into during the period, if any.
The decreasechange in the fair value positions of the energy-related derivative contracts for the year endedyear-ended December 31, 20082009 was $31.0an increase of $17.5 million, substantially all of which is due to natural gas positions. ThisThe change is attributable to both the volume of million British thermal units (mmBtu) and prices of natural gas. At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had a net hedge volume of 11.0 million mmBtu with a weighted average contract cost approximately $1.26 per mmBtu above market prices, and 14.2 billion cubic feet (Bcf)million mmBtu at December 31, 2008 with a weighted average contract cost approximately $2.24 per million British thermal units (mmBtu) above market prices, and 7.5 Bcf at December 31, 2007 with a weighted average contract cost approximately $0.03 per mmBtu above market prices. Natural gas hedgessettlements are recovered through the fuel cost recovery clause.

II-264


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
At December 31, the net fair value of energy-related derivative contracts by hedge designation was reflected in the financial statements as assets/ (liabilities) as follows:
                
 2008 2007
Asset (Liability) Derivatives 2009 2008
 (in millions) (in thousands)
Regulatory hedges $(31.2) $(0.2) $(13,699) $(31,161)
Cash flow hedges   
Non-accounting hedges   
Not designated 12  
Total fair value $(31.2) $(0.2) $(13,687) $(31,161)
Energy-related derivative contracts designated as regulatory hedges are related to the Company’s fuel hedging programs,program, where gains and losses are initially recorded as regulatory liabilities and assets, respectively, and then are included in fuel expense as they are recovered through the fuel cost recovery clause. Certain other gains and losses on energy-related derivatives, designated as cash flow hedges, are initially deferred in other comprehensive income before being recognized in income in the same period as the hedged transaction. Gains and losses on energy-related derivative contracts that are not designated or fail to qualify as hedges are recognized in the statements of income as incurred.
Unrealized pre-tax gains and losses from energy-related derivative contracts recognized in income were not material for any year presented.
The maturities of the energy-related derivative contracts and the level of the fair value hierarchy in which they fall at December 31, 20082009 are as follows:
                 
  December 31, 2008
  Fair Value Measurements
  Total Maturity
  Fair Value Year 1 Years 2&3 Years 4&5
  (in millions)
Level 1 $  $  $  $ 
Level 2  (31.2)  (25.9)  (5.3)   
Level 3            
 
Fair value of contracts outstanding at end of period $(31.2) $(25.9) $(5.3) $ 
 

II-262


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
                 
  December 31, 2009
  Fair Value Measurements
  Total     Maturity  
  Fair Value Year 1 Years 2&3 Years 4&5
      (in thousands)    
Level 1 $  $  $  $ 
Level 2  (13,687)  (9,288)  (4,264)  (135)
Level 3            
 
Fair value of contracts outstanding at end of period $(13,687) $(9,288) $(4,264) $(135)
 
As part of the adoption of FASB Statement No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” to increase consistency and comparability in fair value measurements and related disclosures, the table above now uses the three-tier fair value hierarchy, as discussed in Note 9 to the financial statements, as opposed to the previously used descriptions “actively quoted,” “external sources,” and “models and other methods.” The three-tier fair value hierarchy focuses on the fair value of the contract itself, whereas the previous descriptions focused on the source of the inputs. Because the Company uses over-the-counter contracts that are not exchange traded but are fair valued using prices which are actively quoted, and thus fall into Level 2. See Note 9 to the valuations of those contracts now appear in Level 2; previously they were shown as “actively quoted.”financial statements for further discussion on fair value measurement.
The Company is exposed to market price risk in the event of nonperformance by counterparties to the derivative energy contracts. The Company’s practice is to enterCompany only enters into agreements and material transactions with counterparties that have investment grade credit ratings by Moody’s and Standard & Poor’sS&P or with counterparties who have posted collateral to cover potential credit exposure. Therefore, the Company does not anticipate market risk exposure from nonperformance by the counterparties. See NotesNote 1 and 6 to the financial statements under “Financial Instruments” and Note 10 to the financial statements for additional information.
Capital Requirements and Contractual Obligations
The construction program of the Company is currently estimated to be $478 million in 2009, $337$271.4 million in 2010, and $400$350.2 million in 2011.2011, and $418.5 million in 2012. Environmental expenditures included in these estimated amounts are $335 million in 2009, $164$113.4 million in 2010, and $233$194.8 million in 2011.2011, and $194.2 million in 2012. The construction programs are subject to periodic review and revision, and actual construction costs may vary from these estimates because of numerous factors. These factors include: changes in business conditions; revised load growth estimates; storm impacts; changes in environmental statutes and regulations; changes in FERC rules and regulations; Florida PSC approvals; changes in legislation; the cost and efficiency of construction labor, equipment, and materials; project scope and design changes; and the cost of capital. In addition, there can be no assurance that costs related to capital expenditures will be fully recovered.
The Company plans to construct a new landfill gas to energy generation facility. Construction of new transmission and distribution facilities and capital improvements, including those needed to meet environmental standards for the Company’s existing generation, transmission, and distribution facilities, is ongoing.
AsIn addition, as discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements, the Company provides postretirement benefits to substantially all employees and funds trusts to the extent required by the FERC and the Florida PSC.
Other funding requirements related to obligations associated with scheduled maturities of long-term debt, as well as the related interest, derivative obligations, preference stock dividends, leases, and other purchase commitments are as follows. See Notes 1, 6, 7, and 710 to the financial statements for additional information.

II-263II-265


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Contractual Obligations
                                            
 2010- 2012- After   2011- 2013- After Uncertain  
 2009 2011 2013 2013 Total 2010 2012 2014 2014 Timing(d) Total
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
Long-term debt(a)
  
Principal $ $110,000 $60,000 $686,255 $856,255  $140,000 $110,000 $135,000 $740,441 $ $1,125,441 
Interest 40,864 81,728 78,110 471,610 672,312  41,237 80,746 77,388 464,144  663,515 
Energy-related derivative obligations(b)
 26,928 5,305   32,233  9,442 4,264 183   13,889 
Preference stock dividends(c)
 6,203 12,405 12,405  31,013  6,203 12,405 12,405   31,013 
Operating leases 5,549 9,064 2,352 2,223 19,188  14,525 20,539 12,793 1,613  49,470 
Purchase commitments(d)
 
Capital(e)
 477,618 737,292   1,214,910 
Limestone(f)
  11,540 12,125 40,182 63,847 
Unrecognized tax benefits and interest(d)
     1,729 1,729 
Purchase commitments(e)
 
Capital(f)
 271,419 768,706    1,040,125 
Limestone(g)
 6,043 12,543 13,178 35,938  67,702 
Coal 282,370 182,486   464,856  515,241 75,561    590,802 
Natural gas(g)
 112,618 128,320 40,276 151,016 432,230 
Purchased power 23,007 53,672 53,997 3,918 �� 134,594 
Long-term service agreements(h)
 7,088 14,903 14,552 25,954 62,497 
Postretirement benefits trust(i)
 34 68   102 
Natural gas(h)
 112,080 137,566 101,176 130,889  481,711 
Purchased power(i)
 39,432 82,474 97,317 659,261  878,484 
Long-term service agreements(j)
 6,315 13,303 13,977 25,583  59,178 
Postretirement benefits trust(k)
 54 107    161 
Total $982,279 $1,346,783 $273,817 $1,381,158 $3,984,037  $1,161,991 $1,318,214 $463,417 $2,057,869 $1,729 $5,003,220 
(a) All amounts are reflected based on final maturity dates. The Company plans to continue to retire higher-cost securities and replace these obligations with lower-cost capital if market conditions permit. Variable rate interest obligations are estimated based on rates as of January 1, 2009,2010, as reflected in the statements of capitalization.
 
(b) For additional information, see Notes 1 and 610 to the financial statements.
 
(c) Preference stock does not mature; therefore, amounts are provided for the next five years only.
 
(d) The timing related to the realization of $1.7 million in unrecognized tax benefits and interest payments in individual years beyond 12 months cannot be reasonably and reliably estimated due to uncertainties in the timing of the effective settlement of tax positions. See Note 5 to the financial statements for additional information.
(e)The Company generally does not enter into non-cancelable commitments for other operations and maintenance expenditures. Total other operations and maintenance expenses for the last three years2009, 2008, and 2007 were $260 million, $277 million, $270 million, and $260$270 million, respectively.
 
(e)(f) The Company forecasts capital expenditures over a three-year period. Amounts represent current estimates of total expenditures. At December 31, 2008,2009, significant purchase commitments were outstanding in connection with the construction program.
 
(f)(g) As part of the Company’s program to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions from its coal plants, the Company has begun construction of flue gas desulfurization projects and has entered into various long-term commitments for the procurement of limestone to be used in suchflue gas desulfurization equipment.
 
(g)(h) Natural gas purchase commitments are based on various indices at the time of delivery. Amounts reflected have been estimated based on the New York Mercantile Exchange future prices at December 31, 2008.2009.
 
(h)(i)The capacity-related costs associated with PPAs are recovered through the purchased power capacity costs recovery clause. See Notes 3 and 7 to the financial statements for additional information.
(j) Long-term service agreements include price escalation based on inflation indices.
 
(i)(k) The Company forecasts postretirement trust contributions over a three-year period. The Company expects that the earliest that cash may have to be contributed to the pension trust fund is 20112012 and such contribution could be significant; however,significant. The projections of the amount vary significantly depending on interpretations of and decisions related to federal legislation passed during 2008 as well as other key variables, including future trust fund performance, and cannot be determined at this time. Therefore,time; therefore, no amounts related to the pension trust fund are included in the table. See Note 2 to the financial statements for additional information related to the pension and postretirement plans, including estimated benefit payments. Certain benefit payments will be made through the related trusts. Other benefit payments will be made from the Company’s corporate assets.

II-264II-266


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Gulf Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
The Company’s 20082009 Annual Report contains forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements concerning retail sales, growth, retail rates, storm damage cost recovery and repairs, fuel cost recovery and other rate actions, environmental regulations and expenditures, earnings growth, access to sources of capital, projections for postretirement benefit trust contributions, financing activities, start and completion of construction projects, impacts of adoption of new accounting rules, impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, impact of healthcare legislation, if any, estimated sales and purchases under new power sale and purchase agreements, and estimated construction and other expenditures. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “could,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “projects,” “predicts,” “potential,” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other similar terminology. There are various factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those suggested by the forward-looking statements; accordingly, there can be no assurance that such indicated results will be realized. These factors include:
the impact of recent and future federal and state regulatory change, including legislative and regulatory initiatives regarding deregulation and restructuring of the electric utility industry, implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, environmental laws including regulation of water quality and emissions of sulfur, nitrogen, mercury, carbon, soot, or particulate matter, or coal combustion byproducts and other substances, and also changes in tax and other laws and regulations to which the Company is subject, as well as changes in application of existing laws and regulations;
current and future litigation, regulatory investigations, proceedings or inquiries, including FERC matters and the EPA civil actions against the Company;
the effects, extent, and timing of the entry of additional competition in the markets in which the Company operates;
variations in demand for electricity, including those relating to weather, the general economy and recovery from the recent recession, population, and business growth (and declines), and the effects of energy conservation measures;
available sources and costs of fuels;
effects of inflation;
ability to control costs;costs and avoid cost overruns during the development and construction of facilities;
investment performance of the Company’s employee benefit plans;
advances in technology;
state and federal rate regulations and the impact of pending and future rate cases and negotiations, including rate actions relating to fuel and storm restorationother cost recovery;recovery mechanisms;
internal restructuring or other restructuring options that may be pursued;
potential business strategies, including acquisitions or dispositions of assets or businesses, which cannot be assured to be completed or beneficial to the Company;
the ability of counterparties of the Company to make payments as and when due and to perform as required;
the ability to obtain new short- and long-term contracts with neighboring utilities;wholesale customers;
the direct or indirect effect on the Company’s business resulting from terrorist incidents and the threat of terrorist incidents;
interest rate fluctuations and financial market conditions and the results of financing efforts, including the Company’s credit ratings;
the ability of the Company to obtain additional generating capacity at competitive prices;
catastrophic events such as fires, earthquakes, explosions, floods, hurricanes, droughts, pandemic health events such as an avian influenza,influenzas, or other similar occurrences;
the direct or indirect effects on the Company’s business resulting from incidents similar toaffecting the August 2003 power outage in the Northeast;U.S. electric grid or operation of generating resources;
the effect of accounting pronouncements issued periodically by standard setting bodies; and
other factors discussed elsewhere herein and in other reports (including the Form 10-K) filed by the Company from time to time with the SEC.
The Company expressly disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

II-265II-267


STATEMENTS OF INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2008, 2007, and 2006
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
             
  2008 2007 2006
      (in thousands)    
Operating Revenues:
            
Retail revenues $1,120,766  $1,006,329  $952,038 
Wholesale revenues —            
Non-affiliates  97,065   83,514   87,142 
Affiliates  106,989   113,178   118,097 
Other revenues  62,383   56,787   46,637 
 
Total operating revenues  1,387,203   1,259,808   1,203,914 
 
Operating Expenses:
            
Fuel  635,634   573,354   534,921 
Purchased power —            
Non-affiliates  29,590   11,994   16,288 
Affiliates  79,750   59,499   57,536 
Other operations and maintenance  277,478   270,440   259,519 
Depreciation and amortization  84,815   85,613   89,170 
Taxes other than income taxes  87,247   82,992   79,808 
 
Total operating expenses  1,194,514   1,083,892   1,037,242 
 
Operating Income
  192,689   175,916   166,672 
Other Income and (Expense):
            
Allowance for equity funds used during construction  9,969   2,374   363 
Interest income  3,155   5,348   5,228 
Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized  (43,098)  (44,680)  (44,133)
Other income (expense), net  (4,064)  (3,876)  (3,548)
 
Total other income and (expense)  (34,038)  (40,834)  (42,090)
 
Earnings Before Income Taxes
  158,651   135,082   124,582 
Income taxes  54,103   47,083   45,293 
 
Net Income
  104,548   87,999   79,289 
Dividends on Preference Stock
  6,203   3,881   3,300 
 
Net Income After Dividends on Preference Stock
 $98,345  $84,118  $75,989 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-266


STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2008, 2007, and 2006
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
             
  2008 2007 2006
      (in thousands)    
Operating Activities:
            
Net income $104,548  $87,999  $79,289 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided from operating activities —            
Depreciation and amortization  93,606   90,694   94,466 
Deferred income taxes  23,949   (10,818)  1,170 
Allowance for equity funds used during construction  (9,969)  (2,374)  (363)
Pension, postretirement, and other employee benefits  1,585   6,062   3,319 
Stock based compensation expense  765   1,141   1,005 
Tax benefit of stock options  215   344   211 
Hedge settlements  (5,220)  3,030   (5,399)
Other, net  (5,150)  (7,074)  7,294 
Changes in certain current assets and liabilities —            
Receivables  (49,885)  10,302   (36,795)
Fossil fuel stock  (36,765)  5,025   (31,297)
Materials and supplies  8,927   (2,625)  (2,330)
Prepaid income taxes  (416)  7,177   (7,060)
Property damage cost recovery  26,143   25,103   24,544 
Other current assets  (307)  (632)  (955)
Accounts payable  (4,561)  (555)  13,876 
Accrued taxes  (6,511)  4,773   (455)
Accrued compensation  570   (1,322)  (3,251)
Other current liabilities  6,418   732   6,165 
 
Net cash provided from operating activities  147,942   216,982   143,434 
 
Investing Activities:
            
Property additions  (377,790)  (241,538)  (154,377)
Cost of removal net of salvage  (8,713)  (9,408)  (4,564)
Construction payables  37,244   10,817   3,309 
Other  576   803   (8,779)
 
Net cash used for investing activities  (348,683)  (239,326)  (164,411)
 
Financing Activities:
            
Increase (decrease) in notes payable, net  107,438   (75,821)  30,981 
Proceeds —            
Senior notes     85,000   110,000 
Common stock issued to parent     80,000    
Preference stock     45,000    
Pollution control revenue bonds  37,000       
Gross excess tax benefit of stock options  298   799   423 
Capital contributions from parent company  75,324   4,174   26,140 
Other long-term debt  110,000       
Redemptions —            
Senior notes  (1,300)      
Pollution control revenue bonds  (37,000)     (12,075)
First mortgage bonds        (25,000)
Other long-term debt     (41,238)  (30,928)
Payment of preference stock dividends  (6,057)  (3,300)  (3,300)
Payment of common stock dividends  (81,700)  (74,100)  (70,300)
Other  (5,167)  (348)  (1,285)
 
Net cash provided from financing activities  198,836   20,166   24,656 
 
Net Change in Cash and Cash Equivalents
  (1,905)  (2,178)  3,679 
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Year
  5,348   7,526   3,847 
 
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Year
 $3,443  $5,348  $7,526 
 
Supplemental Cash Flow Information:
            
Cash paid during the period for —            
Interest (net of $3,973, $1,048, and $160 capitalized, respectively) $39,956  $35,237  $37,297 
Income taxes (net of refunds)  40,176   39,228   54,533 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-267


BALANCE SHEETS
At December 31,2009, 2008, and 2007
Gulf Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
         
Assets 2008 2007
  (in thousands)
Current Assets:
        
Cash and cash equivalents $3,443  $5,348 
Receivables —        
Customer accounts receivable  69,531   63,227 
Unbilled revenues  48,742   39,000 
Under recovered regulatory clause revenues  98,645   58,435 
Other accounts and notes receivable  7,201   7,162 
Affiliated companies  8,516   19,377 
Accumulated provision for uncollectible accounts  (2,188)  (1,711)
Fossil fuel stock, at average cost  108,129   71,012 
Materials and supplies, at average cost  36,836   45,763 
Property damage cost recovery     18,585 
Other regulatory assets  38,907   10,220 
Other  25,655   14,878 
 
Total current assets  443,417   351,296 
 
Property, Plant, and Equipment:
        
In service  2,785,561   2,678,952 
Less accumulated provision for depreciation  971,464   931,968 
 
   1,814,097   1,746,984 
Construction work in progress  391,987   150,870 
 
Total property, plant, and equipment  2,206,084   1,897,854 
 
Other Property and Investments
  15,918   4,563 
 
Deferred Charges and Other Assets:
        
Deferred charges related to income taxes  24,220   17,847 
Prepaid pension costs     107,151 
Other regulatory assets  170,836   97,492 
Other  18,550   22,784 
 
Total deferred charges and other assets  213,606   245,274 
 
Total Assets
 $2,879,025  $2,498,987 
 
             
  2009  2008  2007 
  (in thousands) 
Operating Revenues:
            
Retail revenues $1,106,568  $1,120,766  $1,006,329 
Wholesale revenues, non-affiliates  94,105   97,065   83,514 
Wholesale revenues, affiliates  32,095   106,989   113,178 
Other revenues  69,461   62,383   56,787 
 
Total operating revenues  1,302,229   1,387,203   1,259,808 
 
Operating Expenses:
            
Fuel  573,407   635,634   573,354 
Purchased power, non-affiliates  23,706   29,590   11,994 
Purchased power, affiliates  68,276   79,750   59,499 
Other operations and maintenance  260,274   277,478   270,440 
Depreciation and amortization  93,398   84,815   85,613 
Taxes other than income taxes  94,506   87,247   82,992 
 
Total operating expenses  1,113,567   1,194,514   1,083,892 
 
Operating Income
  188,662   192,689   175,916 
Other Income and (Expense):
            
Allowance for equity funds used during construction  23,809   9,969   2,374 
Interest income  423   3,155   5,348 
Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized  (38,358)  (43,098)  (44,680)
Other income (expense), net  (4,075)  (4,064)  (3,876)
 
Total other income and (expense)  (18,201)  (34,038)  (40,834)
 
Earnings Before Income Taxes
  170,461   158,651   135,082 
Income taxes  53,025   54,103   47,083 
 
Net Income
  117,436   104,548   87,999 
Dividends on Preference Stock
  6,203   6,203   3,881 
 
Net Income After Dividends on Preference Stock
 $111,233  $98,345  $84,118 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-268


BALANCE SHEETSSTATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
AtFor the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007
Gulf Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
         
Liabilities and Stockholder’s Equity 2008 2007
  (in thousands)
Current Liabilities:
        
Notes payable $148,239  $44,625 
Accounts payable —        
Affiliated  50,304   39,375 
Other  90,381   56,823 
Customer deposits  28,017   24,885 
Accrued taxes —        
Income taxes  39,983   30,026 
Other  11,855   10,577 
Accrued interest  8,959   7,698 
Accrued compensation  15,667   15,096 
Other regulatory liabilities  4,602   6,027 
Liabilities from risk management activities  26,928   4,065 
Other  29,047   27,958 
 
Total current liabilities  453,982   267,155 
 
Long-term Debt(See accompanying statements)
  849,265   740,050 
 
Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities:
        
Accumulated deferred income taxes  254,354   240,101 
Accumulated deferred investment tax credits  11,255   12,988 
Employee benefit obligations  97,389   74,021 
Other cost of removal obligations  180,325   172,876 
Other regulatory liabilities  28,596   82,741 
Other  83,769   79,802 
 
Total deferred credits and other liabilities  655,688   662,529 
 
Total Liabilities
  1,958,935   1,669,734 
 
Preference Stock(See accompanying statements)
  97,998   97,998 
 
Common Stockholder’s Equity(See accompanying statements)
  822,092   731,255 
 
Total Liabilities and Stockholder’s Equity
 $2,879,025  $2,498,987 
 
Commitments and Contingent Matters(See notes)
        
 
             
  2009  2008  2007 
  (in thousands) 
Operating Activities:
            
Net income $117,436  $104,548  $87,999 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided from operating activities —            
Depreciation and amortization, total  99,564   93,607   90,694 
Deferred income taxes  (16,545)  23,949   (10,818)
Allowance for equity funds used during construction  (23,809)  (9,969)  (2,374)
Pension, postretirement, and other employee benefits  1,769   1,585   6,062 
Stock based compensation expense  933   765   1,141 
Tax benefit of stock options  17   215   344 
Hedge settlements     (5,220)  3,030 
Other, net  (5,190)  (5,149)  (7,072)
Changes in certain current assets and liabilities —            
-Receivables  83,245   (49,886)  10,301 
-Fossil fuel stock  (75,145)  (36,765)  5,025 
-Materials and supplies  (1,642)  8,927   (2,625)
-Prepaid income taxes  (6,355)  (416)  7,177 
-Property damage cost recovery  10,746   26,143   25,103 
-Other current assets  (204)  (307)  (632)
-Accounts payable  7,890   (4,561)  (556)
-Accrued taxes  (2,404)  (6,511)  4,773 
-Accrued compensation  (6,330)  570   (1,322)
-Other current liabilities  10,255   6,417   732 
 
Net cash provided from operating activities  194,231   147,942   216,982 
 
Investing Activities:
            
Property additions  (421,309)  (377,790)  (241,538)
Investment in restricted cash from pollution control revenue bonds  (49,188)      
Distribution of restricted cash from pollution control revenue bonds  42,841       
Cost of removal net of salvage  (9,751)  (8,713)  (9,408)
Construction payables  (23,603)  37,244   10,817 
Other investing activities  (7,426)  576   803 
 
Net cash used for investing activities  (468,436)  (348,683)  (239,326)
 
Financing Activities:
            
Increase (decrease) in notes payable, net  (49,599)  107,438   (75,820)
Proceeds —            
Common stock issued to parent  135,000      80,000 
Capital contributions from parent company  22,032   75,324   4,174 
Gross excess tax benefit of stock options  51   298   799 
Preference stock        45,000 
Pollution control revenue bonds  130,400   37,000    
Senior notes  140,000      85,000 
Other long-term debt issuances     110,000    
Redemptions —            
Pollution control revenue bonds     (37,000)   
Senior notes  (1,214)  (1,300)   
Other long-term debt        (41,238)
Payment of preference stock dividends  (6,203)  (6,057)  (3,300)
Payment of common stock dividends  (89,300)  (81,700)  (74,100)
Other financing activities  (1,728)  (5,167)  (349)
 
Net cash provided from financing activities  279,439   198,836   20,166 
 
Net Change in Cash and Cash Equivalents
  5,234   (1,905)  (2,178)
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Year
  3,443   5,348   7,526 
 
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Year
 $8,677  $3,443  $5,348 
 
Supplemental Cash Flow Information:
            
Cash paid during the period for —            
Interest (net of $9,489, $3,973 and $1,048 capitalized, respectively) $40,336  $39,956  $35,237 
Income taxes (net of refunds)  73,889   40,176   39,228 
Non-cash decrease in notes payable related to energy services  (8,309)      
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-269


STATEMENTS OF CAPITALIZATIONBALANCE SHEETS
At December 31, 20082009 and 20072008
Gulf Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                 
    2008  2007 2008 2007
  (in thousands) (percent of total)
Long Term Debt:
                 
Long-term notes payable —                 
  4.35% due 2013 $60,000  $60,000         
  4.90% to 5.90% due 2014-2044  528,700   530,000         
  Variable rates (1.645% at 1/1/09) due 2011  110,000            
 
Total long-term notes payable  698,700   590,000         
 
Other long-term debt —                
  Pollution control revenue bonds —                
  2.35% to 6.00% due 2022-2037  153,625   13,000         
  Variable rate (1.05% at 1/1/09) due 2022-2037  3,930   144,555         
 
Total other long-term debt  157,555   157,555         
 
Unamortized debt discount  (6,990)  (7,505)        
 
Total long-term debt (annual interest requirement — $40.9 million)  849,265   740,050   48.0%  47.2%
 
Preferred and Preference Stock:
                
Authorized - 20,000,000 shares—preferred stock                
- 10,000,000 shares—preference stock                
Outstanding - $100 par or stated value — 6% preference stock  53,886   53,886         
— 6.45% preference stock  44,112   44,112         
- 1,000,000 shares (non-cumulative)                
 
Preference stock
(annual dividend requirement — $6.2 million)
  97,998   97,998   5.5   6.2 
 
Common Stockholder’s Equity:
                
Common stock, without par value —                
Authorized - 20,000,000 shares                
Outstanding - 1,792,717 shares  118,060   118,060         
Paid-in capital  511,547   435,008         
Retained earnings  197,417   181,986         
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)  (4,932)  (3,799)        
 
Total common stockholder’s equity  822,092   731,255   46.5   46.6 
 
Total Capitalization
 $1,769,355  $1,569,303   100.0%  100.0%
 
         
Assets 2009  2008 
  (in thousands) 
Current Assets:
        
Cash and cash equivalents $8,677  $3,443 
Restricted cash and cash equivalents  6,347    
Receivables —        
Customer accounts receivable  64,257   69,531 
Unbilled revenues  60,414   48,742 
Under recovered regulatory clause revenues  4,285   98,644 
Other accounts and notes receivable  4,107   7,201 
Affiliated companies  7,503   8,516 
Accumulated provision for uncollectible accounts  (1,913)  (2,188)
Fossil fuel stock, at average cost  183,619   108,129 
Materials and supplies, at average cost  38,478   36,836 
Other regulatory assets, current  19,172   38,908 
Prepaid expenses  44,760   20,363 
Other current assets  3,634   5,292 
 
Total current assets  443,340   443,417 
 
Property, Plant, and Equipment:
        
In service  3,430,503   2,785,561 
Less accumulated provision for depreciation  1,009,807   971,464 
 
Plant in service, net of depreciation  2,420,696   1,814,097 
Construction work in progress  159,499   391,987 
 
Total property, plant, and equipment  2,580,195   2,206,084 
 
Other Property and Investments
  15,923   15,918 
 
Deferred Charges and Other Assets:
        
Deferred charges related to income taxes  39,018   24,220 
Other regulatory assets, deferred  190,971   170,836 
Other deferred charges and assets  24,160   18,550 
 
Total deferred charges and other assets  254,149   213,606 
 
Total Assets
 $3,293,607  $2,879,025 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-270


STATEMENTS OF COMMON STOCKHOLDER’S EQUITYBALANCE SHEETS
For the Years EndedAt December 31, 2008, 2007,2009 and 20062008
Gulf Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                     
              Accumulated  
  Common Paid-In Retained Other Comprehensive  
  Stock Capital Earnings Income (Loss) Total
  (in thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2005
 $38,060  $400,815  $166,279  $(2,810) $602,344 
Net income after dividends on preference stock        75,989      75,989 
Capital contributions from parent company     27,777         27,777 
Other comprehensive income (loss)           (3,112)  (3,112)
Adjustment to initially apply FASB Statement No. 158, net of tax           1,325   1,325 
Cash dividends on common stock        (70,300)     (70,300)
 
Balance at December 31, 2006
  38,060   428,592   171,968   (4,597)  634,023 
Net income after dividends on preference stock        84,118      84,118 
Issuance of common stock  80,000            80,000 
Capital contributions from parent company     6,458         6,458 
Other comprehensive income (loss)           798   798 
Cash dividends on common stock        (74,100)     (74,100)
Other     (42)        (42)
 
Balance at December 31, 2007
  118,060   435,008   181,986   (3,799)  731,255 
Net income after dividends on preference stock        98,345      98,345 
Capital contributions from parent company     76,539         76,539 
Other comprehensive income (loss)           (1,133)  (1,133)
Cash dividends on common stock        (81,700)     (81,700)
Change in benefit plan measurement date        (1,214)     (1,214)
 
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $118,060  $511,547  $197,417  $(4,932) $822,092 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2008, 2007, and 2006
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
             
  2008 2007 2006
      (in thousands)    
Net income after dividends on preference stock
 $98,345  $84,118  $75,989 
 
Other comprehensive income (loss):            
Qualifying hedges:            
Changes in fair value, net of tax of $(1,077), $232, and $(2,082), respectively  (1,716)  371   (3,317)
Reclassification adjustment for amounts included in net income, net of tax of $366, $269, and $140, respectively  583   427   224 
Pension and other postretirement benefit plans:            
Change in additional minimum pension liability, net of tax of $-, $-, and $(13), respectively        (19)
 
Total other comprehensive income (loss)  (1,133)  798   (3,112)
 
Comprehensive Income
 $97,212  $84,916  $72,877 
 
         
Liabilities and Stockholder’s Equity 2009  2008 
  (in thousands)     
Current Liabilities:
        
Securities due within one year $140,000  $ 
Notes payable  90,331   148,239 
Accounts payable —        
Affiliated  47,421   50,304 
Other  80,184   90,381 
Customer deposits  32,361   28,017 
Accrued taxes —        
Accrued income taxes  1,955   39,983 
Other accrued taxes  7,297   11,855 
Accrued interest  10,222   8,959 
Accrued compensation  9,337   15,667 
Other regulatory liabilities, current  22,416   4,602 
Liabilities from risk management activities  9,442   26,928 
Other current liabilities  20,092   29,047 
 
Total current liabilities  471,058   453,982 
 
Long-Term Debt(See accompanying statements)
  978,914   849,265 
 
Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities:
        
Accumulated deferred income taxes  297,405   254,354 
Accumulated deferred investment tax credits  9,652   11,255 
Employee benefit obligations  109,271   97,389 
Other cost of removal obligations  191,248   180,325 
Other regulatory liabilities, deferred  41,399   28,597 
Other deferred credits and liabilities  92,370   83,768 
 
Total deferred credits and other liabilities  741,345   655,688 
 
Total Liabilities
  2,191,317   1,958,935 
 
Preference Stock(See accompanying statements)
  97,998   97,998 
 
Common Stockholder’s Equity(See accompanying statements)
  1,004,292   822,092 
 
Total Liabilities and Stockholder’s Equity
 $3,293,607  $2,879,025 
 
Commitments and Contingent Matters(See notes)
        
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-271


STATEMENTS OF CAPITALIZATION
At December 31, 2009 and 2008
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
                 
  2009 2008 2009 2008
  (in thousands) (percent of total)
Long Term Debt:
                
Long-term notes payable —                
  4.35% due 2013  60,000   60,000         
  4.90% due 2014  75,000   75,000         
  5.25% to 5.90% due 2016-2044  452,486   453,700         
Variable rates (0.35% at 1/1/10) due 2010  140,000            
Variable rates (0.68% at 1/1/10) due 2011  110,000   110,000         
 
Total long-term notes payable  837,486   698,700         
 
Other long-term debt —                
Pollution control revenue bonds —                
1.50% to 6.00% due 2022-2039  218,625   153,625         
Variable rates (0.25% to 0.28% at 1/1/10) due 2022-2039  69,330   3,930         
 
Total other long-term debt  287,955   157,555         
 
Unamortized debt discount  (6,527)  (6,990)        
 
Total long-term debt (annual interest requirement — $41.2 million)  1,118,914   849,265         
Less amount due within one year  140,000            
 
Long-term debt excluding amount due within one year  978,914   849,265   47.0%  48.0%
 
Preferred and Preference Stock:
                
Authorized - 20,000,000 shares—preferred stock                
- 10,000,000 shares—preference stock                
Outstanding - $100 par or stated value — 6% preference stock  53,886   53,886         
— 6.45% preference stock  44,112   44,112         
- 1,000,000 shares (non-cumulative)                
 
Total preference stock
(annual dividend requirement — $6.2 million)
  97,998   97,998   4.7   5.5 
 
Common Stockholder’s Equity:
                
Common stock, without par value —                
Authorized - 20,000,000 shares                
Outstanding - 2009: 3,142,717 shares                
Outstanding - 2008: 1,792,717 shares  253,060   118,060         
Paid-in capital  534,577   511,547         
Retained earnings  219,117   197,417         
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)  (2,462)  (4,932)        
 
Total common stockholder’s equity  1,004,292   822,092   48.3   46.5 
 
Total Capitalization
 $2,081,204  $1,769,355   100.0%  100.0%
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-272


STATEMENTS OF COMMON STOCKHOLDER’S EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
                                       
 
  Number of             Accumulated   
  Common             Other   
  Shares Common Paid-In Retained Comprehensive   
  Issued Stock Capital Earnings Income (Loss) Total
  (in thousands) 
Balance at December 31, 2006
  993  $38,060  $428,592  $171,968  $(4,597) $634,023 
Net income after dividends on preference stock           84,118      84,118 
Issuance of common stock  800   80,000            80,000 
Capital contributions from parent company        6,457         6,457 
Other comprehensive income (loss)              798   798 
Cash dividends on common stock           (74,100)     (74,100)
Other        (41)        (41)
 
Balance at December 31, 2007
  1,793   118,060   435,008   181,986   (3,799)  731,255 
Net income after dividends on preference stock           98,345      98,345 
Capital contributions from parent company        76,539         76,539 
Other comprehensive income (loss)              (1,133)  (1,133)
Cash dividends on common stock           (81,700)     (81,700)
Change in benefit plan measurement date           (1,214)     (1,214)
 
Balance at December 31, 2008
  1,793   118,060   511,547   197,417   (4,932)  822,092 
Net income after dividends on preference stock           111,233      111,233 
Issuance of common stock  1,350   135,000            135,000 
Capital contributions from parent company        23,030         23,030 
Other comprehensive income (loss)              2,470   2,470 
Cash dividends on common stock           (89,300)     (89,300)
Other           (233)     (233)
 
Balance at December 31, 2009
  3,143  $253,060  $534,577  $219,117  $(2,462) $1,004,292 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-273


STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
             
  2009  2008  2007 
      (in thousands) 
Net income after dividends on preference stock
 $111,233  $98,345  $84,118 
 
Other comprehensive income (loss):            
Qualifying hedges:            
Changes in fair value, net of tax of $1,132, $(1,077), and $232, respectively  1,803   (1,716)  370 
Reclassification adjustment for amounts included in net income, net of tax of $419, $366, and $269, respectively  667   583   428 
 
Total other comprehensive income (loss)  2,470   (1,133)  798 
 
Comprehensive Income
 $113,703  $97,212  $84,916 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-274


NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Gulf Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
General
Gulf Power Company (the Company) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Southern Company, which is the parent company of four traditional operating companies, Southern Power Company (Southern Power), Southern Company Services, Inc. (SCS), Southern Communications Services, Inc. (SouthernLINC Wireless), Southern Company Holdings, Inc. (Southern Holdings), Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (Southern Nuclear), and other direct and indirect subsidiaries. The traditional operating companies, Alabama Power Company (Alabama Power), Georgia Power Company (Georgia Power), the Company, and Mississippi Power Company (Mississippi Power), are vertically integrated utilities providing electric service in four Southeastern states. The Company provides retail service to customers in northwest Florida and to wholesale customers in the Southeast. Southern Power constructs, acquires, owns, and manages generation assets and sells electricity at market-based rates in the wholesale market. SCS, the system service company, provides, at cost, specialized services to Southern Company and theits subsidiary companies. SouthernLINC Wireless provides digital wireless communications for use by Southern Company and its subsidiary companies and also markets these services to the public and provides fiber cable services within the Southeast. Southern Holdings is an intermediate holding company subsidiary for Southern Company’s investments in leveraged leases and various other energy-related businesses.leases. Southern Nuclear operates and provides services to Southern Company’s nuclear power plants.
The equity method is used for subsidiariesentities in which the Company has significant influence but does not control and for variable interest entities wherecontrol. Certain prior years’ data presented in the Company is notfinancial statements have been reclassified to conform to the primary beneficiary.current year presentation.
The Company is subject to regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Florida Public Service Commission (PSC). The Company follows accounting principles generally accepted in the United States and complies with the accounting policies and practices prescribed by its regulatory commissions. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires the use of estimates, and the actual results may differ from those estimates.
Reclassifications
Certain prior years’ data presented in the financial statements have been reclassified to conform to current year presentation. For presentation purposes, the statements of income for the prior periods presented have been modified within the operating expenses section to combine the line items “Other operations” and “Maintenance” into a single line item entitled “Other operations and maintenance.” In addition, the statements of income were modified to report a separate line item for “Allowance for equity funds used during construction” previously included in “Other income and expense, net.” In conjunction with such modification, the Company modified its statement of cash flows within the operating activities section to present a separate line item for “Allowance for equity funds used during construction” previously included in “Other, net.” The balance sheet at December 31, 2007 was modified to present a separate line for “Liabilities for risk management activities” previously included in “Other.” These reclassifications had no effect on total assets, net income, or cash flows.
Affiliate Transactions
The Company has an agreement with SCS under which the following services are rendered to the Company at direct or allocated cost: general and design engineering, purchasing, accounting and statistical analysis, finance and treasury, tax, information resources, marketing, auditing, insurance and pension administration, human resources, systems and procedures, digital wireless communications, and other services with respect to business and operations and power pool operations. Costs for these services amounted to $87 million, $86 million, and $73 million during 2009, 2008, and $59 million during 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Cost allocation methodologies used by SCS were approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) prior to the repeal of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, as amended, and management believes they are reasonable. The FERC permits services to be rendered at cost by system service companies.
The Company has agreements with Georgia Power and Mississippi Power under which the Company owns a portion of Plant Scherer and Plant Daniel, respectively. Georgia Power operates Plant Scherer and Mississippi Power operates Plant Daniel. The Company reimbursed Georgia Power $3.9 million, $8.1 million, $5.1 million, and $8.0$5.1 million, and Mississippi Power $20.9 million, $22.8 million, and $23.1 million in 2009, 2008, and $19.7 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively, for its proportionate share of related expenses. See Note 4 and Note 7 under “Operating Leases” for additional information.

II-272


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The Company entered into a power purchase agreement (PPA), with Southern Power for a total of approximately 292 megawatts (MWs) annually from June 2009 through May 2014. The PPA was the result of a competitive request for proposal process initiated by the Company in January 2006 to address the anticipated need for additional capacity beginning in 2009. In May 2007, the Florida PSC issued an order approving the PPA for the purpose of cost recovery through the Company’s purchased power capacity clause. The PPA with Southern Power was approved by the FERC in July 2007.
The Company provides incidental services to and receives such services from other Southern Company subsidiaries which are generally minor in duration and amount. There were no significant services provided or received in 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006.or 2007.

II-275


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The traditional operating companies, including the Company, and Southern Power jointly enter into various types of wholesale energy, natural gas, and certain other contracts, either directly or through SCS, as agent. Each participating company may be jointly and severally liable for the obligations incurred under these agreements. See Note 7 under “Fuel and Purchased Power Commitments” for additional information.
In 2008, the Company sold a turbine rotor assembly and a distance piece component to Southern Power for $9.4 million and $0.7 million, respectively. In 2007, the Company purchased a compressor assembly from Georgia Power and a turbine rotor assembly from Southern Power for $4.0 million and $7.9 million, respectively. The affiliate transactions were made in accordance with FERC and state PSC rules and guidelines. The purchases are included in property, plant, and equipment in the balance sheets.
Regulatory Assets and Liabilities
The Company is subject to the provisions of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Statement No. 71, “Accountingin accounting for the Effectseffects of Certain Types of Regulation” (SFAS No. 71).rate regulation. Regulatory assets represent probable future revenues associated with certain costs that are expected to be recovered from customers through the ratemaking process. Regulatory liabilities represent probable future reductions in revenues associated with amounts that are expected to be credited to customers through the ratemaking process. Regulatory assets and (liabilities) reflected in the balance sheets at December 31 relate to:
                        
 2008 2007 Note 2009 2008 Note
 (in thousands) (in thousands) 
Environmental remediation $66,812 $66,923  (a)
Loss on reacquired debt 16,248 17,378  (b)
Vacation pay 7,991 7,411  (c)
Deferred charges related to income taxes 24,220 17,847  (d)
Fuel-hedging (realized and unrealized) losses 35,333 1,834  (e)
Underfunded retiree benefit plans 81,912 14,602  (f)
Other assets 3,360 1,371  (g)
Under recovered regulatory clause revenues 96,731 56,628  (g)
Property damage reserve  (9,801) 18,585  (h)
Deferred income tax charges $39,018 $24,220  (a)
Asset retirement obligations  (4,531)  (4,570)  (d)  (4,371)  (4,531)  (a,i)
Other cost of removal obligations  (180,325)  (172,876)  (d)  (191,248)  (180,325)  (a)
Deferred income tax credits  (12,983)  (15,331)  (d)  (11,412)  (12,983)  (a)
Loss on reacquired debt 14,599 16,248  (b)
Vacation pay 8,120 7,991  (c,i)
Under recovered regulatory clause revenues 2,384 96,731  (d)
Over recovered regulatory clause revenues  (14,510)  (3,295)  (d)
Property damage reserve  (24,046)  (9,801)  (e)
Fuel-hedging (realized and unrealized) losses 15,367 35,333  (f,i)
Fuel-hedging (realized and unrealized) gains  (1,071)  (1,455)  (e)  (190)  (1,071)  (f,i)
Over recovered regulatory clause revenues  (3,295)  (5,233)  (g)
PPA charges 8,141   (i,j)
Generation site selection/evaluation costs 8,373 2,370  (k)
Other assets 131 990  (d,i)
Environmental remediation 65,223 66,812  (g,i)
PPA credits  (7,536)   (i,j)
Other liabilities  (1,518)  (1,715)  (g)  (715)  (1,518)  (d)
Overfunded retiree benefit plans   (60,464)  (f)
Underfunded retiree benefit plans 91,055 81,912  (h,i)
Total assets (liabilities), net $119,083 $(59,065)  $(1,617) $119,083 
Note: The recovery and amortization periods for these regulatory assets and (liabilities) are as follows:
(a)Recovered through the environmental cost recovery clause when the remediation is performed.
 
(b)Recovered over the remaining life of the original issue, which may range up to 40 years.
(c)Recorded as earned by employees and recovered as paid, generally within one year.
(d)(a) Asset retirement and removal assets and liabilities are recovered, deferred charges related to income tax assets are recovered, and deferred charges related to income tax liabilities are amortized over the related property lives, which may range up to 65 years. Asset retirement and removal liabilities will be settled and trued up following completion of the related activities.
 
(b)Recovered over either the remaining life of the original issue or, if refinanced, over the life of the new issue, which may range up to 40 years.
(c)Recorded as earned by employees and recovered as paid, generally within one year.
(d)Recorded and recovered or amortized as approved by the Florida PSC, generally within one year.
(e)Recorded and recovered or amortized as approved by the Florida PSC. The storm cost recovery surcharge ended in June 2009.
(f) Fuel-hedging assets and liabilities are recognized over the life of the underlying hedged purchase contracts, which generally do not exceed four years. Upon final settlement, costs are recovered through the fuel cost recovery clause.
 
(f)(g)Recovered through the environmental cost recovery clause when the remediation is performed.
(h) Recovered and amortized over the average remaining service period which may range up to 14 years. See Note 2 under “Retirement Benefits.”for additional information.
 
(g)(i) Recorded and recoveredNot earning a return as offset in rate base by a corresponding asset or amortized as approved by the Florida PSC.liability.
 
(h)(j) Recorded and recovered or amortized as approved byRecovered over the life of the PPA for periods up to 14 years.
(k)Deferred pursuant to Florida PSC. Storm cost recovery surcharge ends in June 2009.Statute while the Company continues to evaluate certain potential new generation projects.

II-273


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
In the event that a portion of the Company’s operations is no longer subject to the provisions of SFAS No. 71,applicable accounting rules for rate regulation, the Company would be required to write off or reclassify to accumulated other comprehensive income related regulatory assets and liabilities that are not specifically recoverable through regulated rates. In addition, the Company would be required to determine if any impairment to other assets, including plant, assets, exists and write down the assets, if impaired, to their fair values. All regulatory assets and liabilities are to be reflected in rates.

II-276


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Revenues
Energy and other revenues are recognized as services are provided. Unbilled revenues related to retail sales are accrued at the end of each fiscal period. Wholesale capacity revenues are generally recognized on a levelized basis over the appropriate contract period. The Company’s retail electric rates include provisions to adjust billings for fluctuations in fuel costs, the energy component of purchased power costs, and certain other costs. The Company continuously monitors the over or under recovered fuel cost balance in light of the inherent variability in fuel costs. The Company is required to notify the Florida PSC if the projected fuel cost over or under recovery is expected to exceed 10% of the projected fuel revenue applicable for the period and indicate if an adjustment to the fuel cost recovery factor is being requested. The Company has similar retail cost recovery clauses for energy conservation costs, purchased power capacity costs, and environmental compliance costs. Revenues are adjusted for differences between these actual costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Under or over recovered regulatory clause revenues are recorded in the balance sheets and are recovered or returned to customers through adjustments to the billing factors. Annually, the Company petitions for recovery of projected costs including any true-up amountamounts from prior periods, and approved rates are implemented each January. In November 2008, the Florida PSC approved billing factors for 2009 intended to allow the Company to recover projected 2009 costs as well as refund or collect the 2008 over or under recovered amounts in 2009. See Note 3 under “Regulatory Matters — Fuel Cost Recovery”“Retail Regulatory Matters” for additional information.
The Company has a diversified base of customers. No single customer or industry comprises 10% or more of revenues. For all periods presented, uncollectible accounts averaged less than 1% of revenues.
Fuel Costs
Fuel costs are expensed as the fuel is used.
Income and Other Taxes
The Company uses the liability method of accounting for deferred income taxes and provides deferred income taxes for all significant income tax temporary differences. Investment tax credits utilized are deferred and amortized to income over the average life of the related property. Taxes that are collected from customers on behalf of governmental agencies to be remitted to these agencies are presented net on the statements of income.
In accordance with FASB Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertaintyaccounting standards related to the uncertainty in Income Taxes” (FIN 48),income taxes, the Company recognizes tax positions that are “more likely than not” of being sustained upon examination by the appropriate taxing authorities. See Note 5 under “Unrecognized Tax Benefits” for additional information.
Property, Plant, and Equipment
Property, plant, and equipment is stated at original cost less regulatory disallowances and impairments. Original cost includes: materials; labor; minor items of property; appropriate administrative and general costs; payroll-related costs such as taxes, pensions, and other benefits; and the interest capitalized and/or cost of funds used during construction.

II-274


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The Company’s property, plant, and equipment consisted of the following at December 31:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
Generation $1,445,095 $1,390,635  $2,034,826 $1,445,095 
Transmission 305,097 282,408  317,298 305,097 
Distribution 900,793 873,642  938,393 900,793 
General 131,269 128,704  136,934 131,269 
Plant acquisition adjustment 3,307 3,563  3,052 3,307 
Total plant in service $2,785,561 $2,678,952  $3,430,503 $2,785,561 
The cost of replacements of property, exclusive of minor items of property, is capitalized. The cost of maintenance, repairs, and replacement of minor items of property is charged to maintenance expense as incurred or performed.

II-277


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation of the original cost of utility plant in service is provided primarily by using composite straight-line rates, which approximated 3.1% in 2009, 3.4% in 2008, and 3.4% in 2007, and 3.7% in 2006.2007. Depreciation studies are conducted periodically to update the composite rates. These studies are approved by the Florida PSC. When property subject to depreciation is retired or otherwise disposed of in the normal course of business, its original cost, together with the cost of removal, less salvage, is charged to accumulated depreciation. For other property dispositions, the applicable cost and accumulated depreciation is removed from the balance sheet accounts and a gain or loss is recognized. Minor items of property included in the original cost of the plant are retired when the related property unit is retired.
Asset Retirement Obligations and Other Costs of Removal
Asset retirement obligations are computed as the present value of the ultimate costs for an asset’s future retirement and are recorded in the period in which the liability is incurred. The costs are capitalized as part of the related long-lived asset and depreciated over the asset’s useful life. The Company has received an order from the Florida PSC allowing the continued accrual of other future retirement costs for long-lived assets that the Company does not have a legal obligation to retire. Accordingly, the accumulated removal costs for these obligations will continue to beare reflected in the balance sheets as a regulatory liability.
The liability recognized to retire long-lived assets primarily relates to the Company’s combustion turbines at its Pea Ridge facility, various landfill sites, a barge unloading dock, asbestos removal, ash ponds, and disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls in certain transformers. The Company also has identified retirement obligations related to certain transmission and distribution facilities, certain wireless communication towers, and certain structures authorized by the United StatesU.S. Army Corps of Engineers. However, liabilities for the removal of these assets have not been recorded because the range of time over which the Company may settle these obligations is unknown and cannot be reasonably estimated. The Company will continue to recognize in the statements of income allowed removal costs in accordance with its regulatory treatment. Any differences between costs recognized under FASB Statement No. 143 “Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations”in accordance with accounting standards related to asset retirement and FASB Interpretation No. 47, “Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations”environmental obligations and those reflected in rates are recognized as either a regulatory asset or liability, as ordered by the Florida PSC, and are reflected in the balance sheets.
Details of the asset retirement obligations included in the balance sheets are as follows:
         
   2008   2007 
  (in thousands) 
Balance beginning of year $11,942  $12,718 
Liabilities incurred     503 
Liabilities settled  (354)  (484)
Accretion  631   619 
Cash flow revisions  (177)  (1,414)
 
Balance end of year $12,042  $11,942 
 

II-275


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
         
  2009 2008
  (in thousands)
Balance beginning of year $12,042  $11,942 
Liabilities incurred  224    
Liabilities settled  (300)  (354)
Accretion  642   631 
Cash flow revisions     (177)
 
Balance end of year $12,608  $12,042 
 
Allowance for Funds Used During Construction (AFUDC)
In accordance with regulatory treatment, the Company records AFUDC, which represents the estimated debt and equity costs of capital funds that are necessary to finance the construction of new regulated facilities. While cash is not realized currently from such allowance, it increases the revenue requirement over the service life of the plant through a higher rate base and higher depreciation expense.depreciation. The equity component of AFUDC is not included in calculating taxable income. The average annual AFUDC rate was 7.65%, 7.48%7.65%, and 7.48%, respectively, for the years 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006.2007. AFUDC, net of taxes, as a percentage of net income after dividends on preference stock was 12.62%26.64%, 3.59%12.62%, and 0.61%3.59%, respectively, for 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006.2007.
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets and Intangibles
The Company evaluates long-lived assets for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of such assets may not be recoverable. The determination of whether an impairment has occurred is based on either a specific regulatory disallowance or an estimate of undiscounted future cash flows attributable to the assets, as compared with the carrying value of the assets. If an impairment has occurred, the amount of the impairment recognized is determined by either the amount of regulatory disallowance or by estimating the fair value of the assets and recording a loss if the carrying value is greater than the fair value. For

II-278


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
assets identified as held for sale, the carrying value is compared to the estimated fair value less the cost to sell in order to determine if an impairment loss is required. Until the assets are disposed of, their estimated fair value is re-evaluated when circumstances or events change.
Property Damage Reserve
The Company accrues for the cost of repairing damages from major storms and other uninsured property damages, including uninsured damages to transmission and distribution facilities, generation facilities, and other property. The costcosts of such damages isdamage are charged to the reserve. The Florida PSC approvedPSC-approved annual accrual to the property damage reserve is $3.5 million, with a target level for the reserve between $25.1 million and $36.0 million. The Florida PSC also authorized the Company to make additional accruals above the $3.5 million at the Company’s discretion. The Company accrued total expenses of $3.5 million in 2008,2009, $3.5 million in 2007,2008, and $6.5$3.5 million in 2006.2007. As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, the balance in the Company’s property damage reserve totaled approximately $24.0 million and $9.8 million, respectively, which is included in deferred liabilities in the balance sheets. See Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Storm Damage Cost Recovery” for additional information regarding
When the surcharge mechanism approved byproperty damage reserve is inadequate to cover the cost of major storms, the Florida PSC can authorize a storm cost recovery surcharge to replenish these reserves.be applied to customer bills. Such a surcharge was authorized in 2005 after Hurricane Ivan in 2004 and was extended by a 2006 Florida PSC order approving a stipulation to address costs incurred as a result of Hurricanes Dennis and Katrina in 2005. According to the 2006 Florida PSC order, in the case of future storms, if the Company incurs cumulative costs for storm-recovery activities in excess of $10 million during any calendar year, the Company will be permitted to file a streamlined formal request for an interim surcharge. Any interim surcharge would provide for the recovery, subject to refund, of up to 80% of the claimed costs for storm-recovery activities. The Company would then petition the Florida PSC for full recovery through a final or non-interim surcharge or other cost recovery mechanism.
Injuries and Damages Reserve
The Company is subject to claims and suitslawsuits arising in the ordinary course of business. As permitted by the Florida PSC, the Company accrues for the uninsured costs of injuries and damages by charges to income amounting to $1.6 million annually. The Florida PSC has also given the Company the flexibility to increase its annual accrual above $1.6 million to the extent the balance in the reserve does not exceed $2 million and to defer expense recognition of liabilities greater than the balance in the reserve. The cost of settling claims is charged to the reserve. The injuries and damages reserve was $2.5$2.9 million and $2.2$2.5 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. For 2009, $1.6 million and 2007, respectively,$1.3 million are included in current liabilities and deferred credits and other liabilities in the balance sheets, respectively. For 2008, $2.5 million is included in Current Liabilitiescurrent liabilities in the balance sheets. Liabilities in excess of the reserve balance of $0.8$0.1 million and $0.8 million at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, respectively, are included in Deferred Creditsdeferred credits and Other Liabilitiesother liabilities in the balance sheets. Corresponding regulatory assets of $0.8$0.1 million and $0.8 million at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, respectively, are included in Current Assetscurrent assets in the balance sheets.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
For purposes of the financial statements, temporary cash investments are considered cash equivalents. Temporary cash investments are securities with original maturities of 90 days or less.
Materials and Supplies
Generally, materials and supplies include the average cost of transmission, distribution, and generating plant materials. Materials are charged to inventory when purchased and then expensed or capitalized to plant, as appropriate, at weighted average cost when installed.

II-276


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Fuel Inventory
Fuel inventory includes the average costs of oil, coal, natural gas, and emissionemissions allowances. Fuel is charged to inventory when purchased and then expensed as used and recovered through fuel cost recovery rates approved by the Florida PSC. EmissionEmissions allowances granted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are included in inventory at zero cost.

II-279


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Financial Instruments
The Company uses derivative financial instruments to limit exposure to fluctuations in interest rates, the prices of certain fuel purchases, and electricity purchases and sales. All derivative financial instruments are recognized as either assets or liabilities (categorized(included in “Other” or shown separately as “Risk Management Activities”) and are measured at fair value. See Note 9 for additional information. Substantially all of the Company’s bulk energy purchases and sales contracts that meet the definition of a derivative are exempt from fair value accounting requirements and are accounted for under the accrual method. Other derivative contracts qualify as cash flow hedges of anticipated transactions or are recoverable through the Florida PSC-approved hedging program. This results in the deferral of related gains and losses in other comprehensive income (OCI) or regulatory assets and liabilities, respectively, until the hedged transactions occur. Any ineffectiveness arising from cash flow hedges is recognized currently in net income. Other derivative contracts are marked to market through current period income and are recorded on a net basis in the statements of income. See Note 6 under “Financial Instruments”10 for additional information.
The Company does not offset fair value amounts recognized for multiple derivative instruments executed with the same counterparty under a master netting arrangement. Additionally, the Company has no outstanding collateral repayment obligations or rights to reclaim collateral arising from derivative instruments recognized at December 31, 2008.2009.
The Company is exposed to losses related to financial instruments in the event of counterparties’ nonperformance. The Company has established controls to determine and monitor the creditworthiness of counterparties in order to mitigate the Company’s exposure to counterparty credit risk.
Other financial instruments for which the carrying amounts did not equal fair values at December 31 were as follows:
         
  Carrying Amount Fair Value
  (in thousands)
Long-term debt:        
2008
 $849,265  $831,763 
2007 $740,050  $725,885 
The fair values were based on either closing market prices (Level 1) or closing prices of comparable instruments (Level 2). See Note 9 for all other items recognized at fair value in the financial statements.
Comprehensive Income
The objective of comprehensive income is to report a measure of all changes in common stock equity of an enterprise that result from transactions and other economic events of the period other than transactions with owners. Comprehensive income consists of net income, and changes in the fair value of qualifying cash flow hedges, and prior to the adoption of SFAS No.158, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans” (SFAS No. 158) the minimum pension liability, less income taxes and reclassifications for amounts included in net income.
Variable Interest Entities
The primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity must consolidate the related assets and liabilities. The Company had established certain wholly-owned trusts to issue preferred securities. The Company is not considered the primary beneficiary of the trusts. Therefore, the investments in these trusts were reflected as Other Investments for the Company, and the related loans from the trusts were included in Long-term Debt in the balance sheets. In November 2007, the Company redeemed $41.2 million of its Series E Junior Subordinated Notes and the related trust preferred and common securities of Gulf Power Capital Trust IV. As of December 31, 2008, the Company no longer had any outstanding trust preferred securities. See Note 6 under “Long-Term Debt Payable to Affiliated Trusts” for additional information.

II-277


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
2. RETIREMENT BENEFITS
The Company has a defined benefit, trusteed, pension plan covering substantially all employees. The plan is funded in accordance with requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (ERISA). No contributions to the defined benefit plan are expected for the year ending December 31, 2009.2010. The Company also provides a defined benefit pension plan for a selected group of management and highly compensated employees. Benefits under thisthese non-qualified planpension plans are funded on a cash basis. In addition, the Company provides certain medical care and life insurance benefits for retired employees through other postretirement benefit plans. The Company funds related trusts to the extent required by the FERC. For the year ending December 31, 2009,2010, postretirement trust contributions are expected to total approximately $34,000.$54,000.
The measurement date for plan assets and obligations for 2009 and 2008 was December 31 while the measurement date for prior years was September 30. Pursuant to SFAS No. 158,accounting standards related to defined postretirement benefit plans, the Company was required to change the measurement date for its defined postretirement benefit postretirement plans from September 30 to December 31 beginning with the year endingended December 31, 2008. As permitted, the Company adopted the measurement date provisions of SFAS No. 158 effective January 1, 2008 resulting in an increase in long-term liabilities of approximately $1.4 million and an increase in prepaid pension costs of approximately $0.6 million.

II-280


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Pension Plans
The total accumulated benefit obligation for the pension plans was $275 million in 2009 and $243 million in 2008 and $230 million in 2007.2008. Changes during the plan year ended December 31, 2009 and the 15-month period ended December 31, 2008 and the 12-month period ended September 30, 2007 in the projected benefit obligations and the fair value of plan assets were as follows:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
Change in benefit obligation
  
Benefit obligation at beginning of year $251,781 $246,569  $260,765 $251,781 
Service cost 8,437 6,835  6,478 8,437 
Interest cost 19,344 14,519  17,139 19,344 
Benefits paid  (15,880)  (11,625)  (12,884)  (15,880)
Plan amendments  1,698    
Actuarial (gain) loss  (2,917)  (6,215)
Actuarial loss (gain) 27,388  (2,917)
Balance at end of year 260,765 251,781  298,886 260,765 
Change in plan assets
  
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year 345,398 305,525  229,407 345,398 
Actual return (loss) on plan assets  (101,036) 50,816  36,840  (101,036)
Employer contributions 925 682  696 925 
Benefits paid  (15,880)  (11,625)  (12,884)  (15,880)
Fair value of plan assets at end of year 229,407 345,398  254,059 229,407 
Funded status at end of year  (31,358) 93,617 
Fourth quarter contributions  149 
Accrued liability $(44,827) $(31,358)
(Accrued liability) prepaid pension asset $(31,358) $93,766 
At December 31, 2008,2009, the projected benefit obligations for the qualified and non-qualified pension plans were $247.9$284 million and $12.9$15 million, respectively. All pension plan assets are related to the qualified pension plan.
Pension plan assets are managed and invested in accordance with all applicable requirements, including ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Internal Revenue Code). In 2009, in determining the optimal asset allocation for the pension fund, the Company performed an extensive study based on projections of both assets and liabilities over a 10-year forward horizon. The primary goal of the study was to maximize plan funded status. The Company’s investment policy covers a diversified mix of assets, including equity and fixed income securities, real estate, and private equity. Derivative instruments are used primarily as hedging tools but may also be used to gain efficient exposure to the various asset classes.classes and as hedging tools. The Company primarily minimizes the risk of large losses primarily through diversification but also monitors and manages other aspects of risk.

II-278


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The actual composition of the Company’s pension plan assets as of the end of the year,December 31, 2009 and 2008, along with the targeted mix of assets, is presented below:
                        
 Target 2008 2007 Target 2009 2008
Domestic equity  36%  34%  38%  29%  33%  34%
International equity 24 23 24  28 29 23 
Fixed income 15 14 15  15 15 14 
Real estate 15 19 16 
Special situations 3   
Real estate investments 15 13 19 
Private equity 10 10 7  10 10 10 
Total  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%
The investment strategy for plan assets related to the Company’s defined benefit plan is to be broadly diversified across major asset classes. The asset allocation is established after consideration of various factors that affect the assets and liabilities of the pension plan including, but not limited to, historical and expected returns, volatility, correlations of asset classes, the current level of assets and liabilities, and the assumed growth in assets and liabilities. Because a significant portion of the liability of the pension plan is long-term in nature, the assets are invested consistent with long-term investment expectations for return and risk. To manage the actual

II-281


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
asset class exposures relative to the target asset allocation, the Company employs a formal rebalancing program. As additional risk management, external investment managers and service providers are subject to written guidelines to ensure appropriate and prudent investment practices.
Detailed below is a description of the investment strategies for each major asset category disclosed above:
Domestic equity.This portion of the portfolio comprises a mix of large and small capitalization stocks with generally an equal distribution of value and growth attributes managed both actively and through passive index approaches.
International equity.This portion of the portfolio is actively managed with a blend of growth stocks and value stocks with both developed and emerging market exposure.
Fixed income.This portion of the portfolio is actively managed through an allocation to long-dated, investment grade corporate and government bonds.
Special situations.Though currently unfunded, this portion of the portfolio was established both to execute opportunistic investment strategies with the objectives of diversifying and enhancing returns and exploiting short-term inefficiencies, as well as to invest in promising new strategies of a longer-term nature.
Real estate investments.Assets in this portion of the portfolio are invested in traditional private market, equity-oriented investments in real properties (indirectly through pooled funds or partnerships) and in publicly traded real estate securities.
Private equity.This portion of the portfolio generally consists of investments in private partnerships that invest in private or public securities typically through privately negotiated and/or structured transactions. Leveraged buyouts, venture capital, and distressed debt are examples of investment strategies within this category.
The fair values of pension plan assets as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 are presented below. These fair value measurements exclude cash, receivables related to investment income, pending investments sales, and payables related to pending investment purchases.
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using  
  Quoted Prices      
  in Active Significant    
  Markets for Other Significant  
  Identical Observable Unobservable  
  Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2009: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
   (in thousands) 
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $50,434  $20,856  $  $71,290 
International equity*  65,197   6,497      71,694 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     18,783      18,783 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     5,107      5,107 
Corporate bonds     12,589      12,589 
Pooled funds     455      455 
Cash equivalents and other  126   15,396      15,522 
Special situations            
Real estate investments  7,862      24,699   32,561 
Private equity        25,053   25,053 
 
Total $123,619  $79,683  $49,752  $253,054 
 
Liabilities:                
Derivatives  (202)  (51)     (253)
 
Total $123,417  $79,632  $49,752  $252,801 
 
*Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well-diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.

II-282


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using  
  Quoted Prices      
  in Active Significant    
  Markets for Other Significant  
  Identical Observable Unobservable  
  Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2008: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
                 (in thousands)
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $47,250  $19,242  $  $66,492 
International equity*  42,508   3,909      46,417 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     19,866      19,866 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     9,413      9,413 
Corporate bonds     12,882      12,882 
Pooled funds     139      139 
Cash equivalents and other  994   9,089      10,083 
Special situations            
Real estate investments  6,476      37,790   44,266 
Private equity        22,063   22,063 
 
Total $97,228  $74,540  $59,853  $231,621 
 
Liabilities:                
Derivatives  (348)        (348)
 
Total $96,880  $74,540  $59,853  $231,273 
 
*Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well-diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.
Changes in the fair value measurement of the Level 3 items in the pension plan assets valued using significant unobservable inputs for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:
                 
  2009 2008
  Real Estate Private Real Estate Private
  Investments Equity Investments Equity
  (in thousands) (in thousands)
Beginning balance $37,790  $22,063  $47,025  $23,400 
Actual return on investments:                
Related to investments held at year end  (10,741)  1,724   (7,615)  (6,332)
Related to investments sold during the year  (2,938)  452   180   1,125 
 
Total return on investments  (13,679)  2,176   (7,435)  (5,207)
Purchases, sales, and settlements  588   814   (1,800)  3,870 
Transfers into/out of Level 3            
 
Ending balance $24,699  $25,053  $37,790  $22,063 
 
The fair values presented above are prepared in accordance with applicable accounting standards regarding fair value. For purposes of determining the fair value of the pension plan assets and the appropriate level designation, management relies on information provided by the plan’s trustee. This information is reviewed and evaluated by management with changes made to the trustee information as appropriate.
Securities for which the activity is observable in an active market or traded exchange are categorized as Level 1. Fixed income securities classified as Level 2 are valued utilizing matrix pricing, a common model utilizing observable inputs. Domestic and international equity securities classified as Level 2 consist of pooled funds where the value is not quoted on an exchange but where the value is determined using observable inputs from the market. Securities that are valued using unobservable inputs are classified as Level 3 and include investments in real estate and investments in limited partnerships. The Company invests (through the pension plan trustee) directly in the limited partnerships which then invest in various types of funds or various private entities within a fund. The fair value of the limited partnerships’ investments is based on audited annual capital accounts statements which are generally prepared on a fair value basis. The Company also relies on the fact that, in most instances, the underlying assets held by the limited partnerships

II-283


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
are reported at fair value. External investment managers typically send valuations to both the custodian and to the Company within 90 days of quarter end. The custodian reports the most recent value available and adjusts the value for cash flows since the statement date for each respective fund.
Amounts recognized in the balance sheets related to the Company’s pension plans consist of:of the following:
         
  2008 2007
  (in thousands)
Prepaid pension costs $  $107,151 
Other regulatory assets  71,990   6,561 
Current liabilities, other  (863)  (639)
Other regulatory liabilities     (60,464)
Employee benefit obligations  (30,494)  (12,403)
         
  2009 2008
  (in thousands)
Other regulatory assets, deferred $85,194  $71,990 
Other, current liabilities  (910)  (863)
Employee benefit obligations  (43,917)  (30,495)
 
Presented below are the amounts included in regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities at December 31, 20082009 and 20072008 related to the defined benefit pension plans that had not yet been recognized in net periodic pension cost along with the estimated amortization of such amounts for 2009.2010.
         
  Prior
Service
Cost
 Net
(Gain)
Loss
  (in thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2008:
        
Regulatory assets $9,984  $62,006 
Regulatory liabilities      
 
Total $9,984  $62,006 
 
         
Balance at December 31, 2007:
        
Regulatory assets $1,900  $4,661 
Regulatory liabilities  9,932   (70,396)
 
Total $11,832  $(65,735)
 
         
Estimated amortization in net periodic pension cost in 2009:
        
Regulatory assets $1,478  $224 
Regulatory liabilities      
 
Total $1,478  $224 
 

II-279


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
         
  Prior Service Cost Net (Gain) Loss
  (in thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2009:
        
Regulatory assets $8,506  $76,688 
 
         
Balance at December 31, 2008:
        
Regulatory assets $9,984  $62,006 
 
         
Estimated amortization in net periodic pension cost in 2010:
        
Regulatory assets $1,302  $398 
 
The changes in the balances of regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities related to the defined benefit pension plans for the 15-month periodyear ended December 31, 20082009 and the 12-month period15 months ended September 30, 2007December 31, 2008 are presented in the following table:
                
 Regulatory Regulatory Regulatory Regulatory
 Assets Liabilities Assets Liabilities
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2006
 $5,091 $(23,478)
Net (gain) loss 313  (35,765)
Change in prior service costs 1,698  
Reclassification adjustments: 
Amortization of prior service costs  (199)  (1,221)
Amortization of net gain  (342)  
Total reclassification adjustments  (541)  (1,221)
Total change 1,470  (36,986)
Balance at December 31, 2007
 $6,561 $(60,464) $6,561 $(60,464)
Net (gain) loss 66,170 61,989 
Net loss (gain) 66,170 61,989 
Change in prior service costs      
Reclassification adjustments:  
Amortization of prior service costs  (323)  (1,525)  (323)  (1,525)
Amortization of net gain  (418)    (418)  
Total reclassification adjustments  (741)  (1,525)  (741)  (1,525)
Total change 65,429 60,464  65,429 60,464 
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $71,990 $  $71,990 $ 
Net loss (gain) 14,906  
Change in prior service costs   
Reclassification adjustments: 
Amortization of prior service costs  (1,478)  
Amortization of net gain  (224)  
Total reclassification adjustments  (1,702)  
Total change 13,204  
Balance at December 31, 2009
 $85,194 $ 

II-284


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Components of net periodic pension cost (income) were as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
Service cost $6,750 $6,835 $6,980  $6,478 $6,750 $6,835 
Interest cost 15,475 14,519 13,358  17,139 15,475 14,519 
Expected return on plan assets  (23,757)  (21,934)  (20,727)  (24,357)  (23,757)  (21,934)
Recognized net (gain) loss 334 342 463  224 334 342 
Net amortization 1,478 1,419 1,313  1,478 1,478 1,419 
Net periodic pension cost (income) $280 $1,181 $1,387 
Net periodic pension cost $962 $280 $1,181 
Net periodic pension cost (income) is the sum of service cost, interest cost, and other costs netted against the expected return on plan assets. The expected return on plan assets is determined by multiplying the expected rate of return on plan assets and the market-related value of plan assets. In determining the market-related value of plan assets, the Company has elected to amortize changes in the market value of all plan assets over five years rather than recognize the changes immediately. As a result, the accounting value of plan assets that is used to calculate the expected return on plan assets differs from the current fair value of the plan assets.
Future benefit payments reflect expected future service and are estimated based on assumptions used to measure the projected benefit obligation for the pension plans. At December 31, 2008,2009, estimated benefit payments were as follows:
     
  Benefit Payments
  (in thousands)
2009 $13,699 
2010  14,119 
2011  14,662 
2012  15,342 
2013  16,033 
2014 to 2018  95,308 
 

II-280


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
     
  Benefit Payments
  (in thousands)
2010 $14,388 
2011  15,105 
2012  15,825 
2013  16,696 
2014  18,102 
2015 to 2019  106,458 
 
Other Postretirement Benefits
Changes during the plan year ended December 31, 2009 and the 15-month period ended December 31, 2008 and the 12-month period ended September 30, 2007 in the accumulated postretirement benefit obligations (APBO) and in the fair value of plan assets were as follows:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
Change in benefit obligation
  
Benefit obligation at beginning of year $73,909 $73,985  $72,391 $73,909 
Service cost 1,766 1,351  1,328 1,766 
Interest cost 5,671 4,330  4,705 5,671 
Benefits paid  (4,864)  (3,586)  (4,115)  (4,864)
Actuarial (gain) loss  (4,522)  (2,430) 497  (4,522)
Plan amendments  (2,416)  
Retiree drug subsidy 431 259  250 431 
Balance at end of year 72,391 73,909  72,640 72,391 
 
Change in plan assets
  
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year 19,610 17,640  13,180 19,610 
Actual return (loss) on plan assets  (5,556) 2,934  2,735  (5,556)
Employer contributions 3,559 2,363  2,923 3,559 
Benefits paid  (4,433)  (3,327)  (3,865)  (4,433)
Fair value of plan assets at end of year 13,180 19,610  14,973 13,180 
Funded status at end of year  (59,211)  (54,299)
Fourth quarter contributions  872 
Accrued liability $(59,211) $(53,427) $(57,667) $(59,211)

II-285


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Other postretirement benefit plan assets are managed and invested in accordance with all applicable requirements, including ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code.Code of 1986, as amended (Internal Revenue Code). The Company’s investment policy covers a diversified mix of assets, including equity and fixed income securities, real estate, and private equity. Derivative instruments are used primarily as hedging tools but may also be used to gain efficient exposure to the various asset classes. The Company primarily minimizes the risk of large losses through diversification but also monitors and manages other aspects of risk. The actual composition of the Company’s other postretirement benefit plan assets as of the end of the year, along with the targeted mix of assets, is presented below:
                        
 Target 2008 2007 Target 2009 2008
Domestic equity  35%  33%  37%  28%  32%  33%
International equity 23 22 23  27 28 22 
Fixed income 18 17 17  18 18 17 
Real estate 14 19 16 
Special situations 3   
Real estate investments 14 12 19 
Private equity 10 9 7  10 10 9 
Total  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%
Detailed below is a description of the investment strategies for each major asset category disclosed above:
Domestic equity.This portion of the portfolio comprises a mix of large and small capitalization stocks with generally an equal distribution of value and growth attributes managed both actively and through passive index approaches.
International equity.This portion of the portfolio is actively managed with a blend of growth stocks and value stocks with both developed and emerging market exposure.
Fixed income.This portion of the portfolio is comprised of domestic bonds.
Special situations.Though currently unfunded, this portion of the portfolio was established both to execute opportunistic investment strategies with the objectives of diversifying and enhancing returns and exploiting short-term inefficiencies, as well as to invest in promising new strategies of a longer-term nature.
Trust-owned life insurance.Some of the Company’s taxable trusts invest in these investments in order to minimize the impact of taxes on the portfolio.
Real estate investments.Assets in this portion of the portfolio are invested in traditional private market, equity-oriented investments in real properties (indirectly through pooled funds or partnerships) and in publicly traded real estate securities.
Private equity.This portion of the portfolio generally consists of investments in private partnerships that invest in private or public securities typically through privately negotiated and/or structured transactions. Leveraged buyouts, venture capital, and distressed debt are examples of investment strategies within this category.

II-286


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The fair values of other postretirement benefit plan assets as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 are presented below. These fair value measurements exclude cash, receivables related to investment income, pending investments sales, and payables related to pending investment purchases.
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using  
  Quoted Prices      
  in Active Significant    
  Markets for Other Significant  
  Identical Observable Unobservable  
  Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2009: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
              (in thousands)
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $2,706  $1,119  $  $3,825 
International equity*  3,499   348      3,847 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     1,008      1,008 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     274      274 
Corporate bonds     675      675 
Pooled funds     553      553 
Cash equivalents and other  8   827      835 
Trust-owned life insurance            
Special situations            
Real estate investments  420      1,326   1,746 
Private equity        1,346   1,346 
 
Total $6,633  $4,804  $2,672  $14,109 
 
Liabilities:                
Derivatives  (11)  (3)     (14)
 
Total $6,622  $4,801  $2,672  $14,095 
 
*Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well-diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using  
  Quoted Prices      
  in Active Significant    
  Markets for Other Significant  
  Identical Observable Unobservable  
  Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2008: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
              (in thousands)
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $2,591  $1,055  $  $3,646 
International equity*  2,332   216      2,548 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     1,089      1,089 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     516      516 
Corporate bonds     706      706 
Pooled funds     551      551 
Cash equivalents and other  54   499      553 
Trust-owned life insurance            
Special situations            
Real estate investments  355      2,073   2,428 
Private equity        1,211   1,211 
 
Total $5,332  $4,632  $3,284  $13,248 
 
Liabilities:                
Derivatives  (20)        (20)
 
Total $5,312  $4,632  $3,284  $13,228 
 
*Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well-diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.

II-287


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Changes in the fair value measurement of the Level 3 items in the other postretirement benefit plan assets valued using significant unobservable inputs for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:
                 
  2009 2008
  Real Estate Private Real Estate Private
  Investments Equity Investments Equity
  (in thousands) (in thousands)
Beginning balance $2,073  $1,211  $2,499  $1,243 
Actual return on investments:                
Related to investments held at year end  (624)  68   (339)  (297)
Related to investments sold during the year  (154)  25   9   59 
 
Total return on investments  (778)  93   (330)  (238)
Purchases, sales, and settlements  31   42   (96)  206 
Transfers into/out of Level 3            
 
Ending balance $1,326  $1,346  $2,073  $1,211 
 
The fair values presented above are prepared in accordance with applicable accounting standards regarding fair value. For purposes of determining the fair value of the pension plan assets and the appropriate level designation, management relies on information provided by the plan’s trustee. This information is reviewed and evaluated by management with changes made to the trustee information as appropriate.
Securities for which the activity is observable in an active market or traded exchange are categorized as Level 1. Fixed income securities classified as Level 2 are valued utilizing matrix pricing, a common model utilizing observable inputs. Domestic and international equity securities classified as Level 2 consist of pooled funds where the value is not quoted on an exchange but where the value is determined using observable inputs from the market. Securities that are valued using unobservable inputs are classified as Level 3 and include investments in real estate and investments in limited partnerships. The Company invests (through the pension plan trustee) directly in the limited partnerships which then invest in various types of funds or various private entities within a fund. The fair value of the limited partnerships’ investments is based on audited annual capital accounts statements which are generally prepared on a fair value basis. The Company also relies on the fact that, in most instances, the underlying assets held by the limited partnerships are reported at fair value. External investment managers typically send valuations to both the custodian and to the Company within 90 days of quarter end. The custodian reports the most recent value available and adjusts the value for cash flows since the statement date for each respective fund.
Amounts recognized in the balance sheets related to the Company’s other postretirement benefit plans consist of:
         
  2008 2007
  (in thousands)
Other regulatory assets $9,922  $8,040 
Current liabilities, other  (500)  (511)
Employee benefit obligations  (58,711)  (52,916)
 

II-281


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
         
  2009 2008
  (in thousands)
Other regulatory assets, deferred $5,861  $9,922 
Other current liabilities     (500)
Employee benefit obligations  (57,667)  (58,711)
 
Presented below are the amounts included in regulatory assets at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008 related to the other postretirement benefit plans that had not yet been recognized in net periodic postretirement benefit cost along with the estimated amortization of such amounts for 2009.2010.
             
  Prior Net Transition
  Service Cost (Gain) Loss Obligation
  (in thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2008:
            
Regulatory assets $3,187  $5,302  $1,433 
 
Balance at December 31, 2007:
            
Regulatory assets $3,619  $2,544  $1,877 
 
Estimated amortization as net periodic postretirement benefit cost in 2009:
            
Regulatory assets $346  $(87) $356 
 
             
  Prior Service Net Transition
  Cost (Gain)Loss Obligation
  (in thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2009:
            
Regulatory asset $881  $4,273  $707 
 
Balance at December 31, 2008:
            
Regulatory asset $3,187  $5,302  $1,433 
 
Estimated amortization as net periodic postretirement cost in 2010:
            
Regulatory asset $186  $(37) $257 
 

II-288


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The changechanges in the balance of regulatory assets related to the other postretirement benefit plans for the 15-month periodplan year ended December 31, 20082009 and the 12-month period15 months ended September 30, 2007December 31, 2008 are presented in the following table:
        
 Regulatory Regulatory
 Assets Assets
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
Beginning balance $12,877 
Net gain  (4,045)
Change in prior service costs  
Reclassification adjustments: 
Amortization of transition obligation  (356)
Amortization of prior service costs  (346)
Amortization of net gain  (90)
Total reclassification adjustments  (792)
Total change  (4,837)
Balance at December 31, 2007
 $8,040  $8,040 
Net gain 2,759 
Change in prior service costs  
Net loss 2,759 
Change in prior service costs/transition obligation  
Reclassification adjustments:  
Amortization of transition obligation  (445)  (445)
Amortization of prior service costs  (432)  (432)
Amortization of net gain    
Total reclassification adjustments  (877)  (877)
Total change 1,882  1,882 
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $9,922  $9,922 
Net gain  (1,097)
Change in prior service costs/transition obligation  (2,416)
Reclassification adjustments: 
Amortization of transition obligation  (323)
Amortization of prior service costs  (293)
Amortization of net gain 68 
Total reclassification adjustments  (548)
Total change  (4,061)
Balance at December 31, 2009
 $5,861 
Components of the other postretirement benefit plans’ net periodic cost were as follows:
             
  2008 2007 2006
  (in thousands)
Service cost $1,413  $1,351  $1,424 
Interest cost  4,536   4,330   3,940 
Expected return on plan assets  (1,452)  (1,320)  (1,264)
Net amortization  702   792   857 
 
Net postretirement cost $5,199  $5,153  $4,957 
 

II-282


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
             
  2009 2008 2007
      (in thousands)    
Service cost $1,328  $1,413  $1,351 
Interest cost  4,705   4,536   4,330 
Expected return on plan assets  (1,436)  (1,452)  (1,320)
Net amortization  548   702   792 
 
Net postretirement cost $5,145  $5,199  $5,153 
 
The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Medicare Act) provides a 28% prescription drug subsidy for Medicare eligible retirees. The effect of the subsidy reduced the Company’s expenses for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007 by approximately $1.3 million, $1.4 million, and $1.5 million, and $1.7 million, respectively.

II-289


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Future benefit payments, including prescription drug benefits, reflect expected future service and are estimated based on assumptions used to measure the APBO for the postretirement plans. Estimated benefit payments are reduced by drug subsidy receipts expected as a result of the Medicare Act as follows:
                        
 Benefit Subsidy  Benefit Subsidy  
 Payments Receipts Total Payments Receipts Total
 (in thousands) (in thousands)      
2009 $4,475 $(378) $4,097 
2010 4,792  (442) 4,350  $4,528 $(382) $4,146 
2011 5,202  (494) 4,708  4,942  (422) 4,520 
2012 5,449  (565) 4,884  5,173  (482) 4,691 
2013 5,689  (638) 5,051  5,385  (543) 4,842 
2014 to 2018 31,319  (4,401) 26,918 
2014 5,606  (607) 4,999 
2015 to 2019 29,912  (4,076) 25,836 
Actuarial Assumptions
The weighted average rates assumed in the actuarial calculations used to determine both the benefit obligations as of the measurement date and the net periodic costs for the pension and other postretirement benefit plans for the following year are presented below. Net periodic benefit costs were calculated in 20052006 for the 20062007 plan year using a discount rate of 5.50%6.00% and an annual salary increase of 3.50%.
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
Discount  6.75%  6.30%  6.00%
Discount rate: 
Pension plans  5.93%  6.75%  6.30%
Other postretirement benefit plans 5.84 6.75 6.30 
Annual salary increase 3.75 3.75 3.50  4.18 3.75 3.75 
Long-term return on plan assets 8.50 8.50 8.50  
Pension plans 8.50 8.50 8.50 
Other postretirement benefit plans 8.36 8.38 8.36 
The Company determinedestimates the long-termexpected rate of return on pension plan and other postretirement benefit plan assets using a financial model to project the expected return on each current investment portfolio. The analysis projects an expected rate of return on each of seven different asset classes in order to arrive at the expected return on the entire portfolio relying on each trust’s target asset allocation and reasonable capital market assumptions. The financial model is based on historicalfour key inputs: anticipated returns by asset class returns(based in part on historical returns), each trust’s asset allocation, an anticipated inflation rate, and current market conditions, taking into account the diversification benefitsprojected impact of investing in multiple asset classes.a periodic rebalancing of each trust’s portfolio.
An additional assumption used in measuring the APBO was a weighted average medical care cost trend rate of 9.15%8.50% for 2009,2010, decreasing gradually to 5.50%5.25% through the year 20152016 and remaining at that level thereafter. An annual increase or decrease in the assumed medical care cost trend rate of 1% would affect the APBO and the service and interest cost components at December 31, 20082009 as follows:
                
 1 Percent 1 Percent 1 Percent 1 Percent
 Increase Decrease Increase Decrease
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
Benefit obligation $3,904 $4,211  $3,571 $3,214 
Service and interest costs 275 236  273 294 
Employee Savings Plan
The Company also sponsors a 401(k) defined contribution plan covering substantially all employees. The Company provides an 85% matching contribution up to 6% of an employee’s base salary. Prior to November 2006, the Company matched employee contributions at a rate of 75% up to 6% of the employee’s base salary. Total matching contributions made to the plan for 2009, 2008, and 2007 and 2006 were $3.5$3.7 million, $3.5 million, and $3.0$3.5 million, respectively.

II-283II-290


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
3. CONTINGENCIES AND REGULATORY MATTERS
General Litigation Matters
The Company is subject to certain claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. In addition, the Company’s business activities are subject to extensive governmental regulation related to public health and the environment.environment such as regulation of air emissions and water discharges. Litigation over environmental issues and claims of various types, including property damage, personal injury, common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of environmental requirements such as opacity and air and water quality standards, has increased generally throughout the United States. In particular, personal injury and other claims for damages caused by alleged exposure to hazardous materials, and common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas and other emissions, have become more frequent. The ultimate outcome of such pending or potential litigation against the Company cannot be predicted at this time; however, for current proceedings not specifically reported herein, management does not anticipate that the liabilities, if any, arising from such current proceedings would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial statements.
Environmental Matters
New Source Review Actions
In November 1999, the EPA brought a civil action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, including Alabama Power and Georgia Power, alleging that these subsidiaries had violated the New Source Review (NSR) provisions of the Clean Air Act and related state laws at certain coal-fired generating facilities. The EPAThese actions were filed concurrently issuedwith the issuance of notices of violation relatingof the NSR provisions to the Company with respect to the Company’s Plant Crist and a unit at Georgia Power’s Plant Scherer that is partially owned by the Company. In early 2000, the EPA filed a motion to amend its complaint to add the allegations in the notice of violation and to add the Company as a defendant. However, in March 2001, the court denied the motion based on lack of jurisdiction, and the EPA has not refiled.Crist. After Alabama Power was dismissed from the original action, for jurisdictional reasons, the EPA filed a separate action in January 2001 against Alabama Power in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. In these lawsuits, the EPA allegedalleges that NSR violations occurred at eight coal-fired generating facilities operated by Alabama Power and Georgia Power.Power, including one facility co-owned by the Company. The civil actions request penalties and injunctive relief, including an order requiring installation of the best available control technology at the affected units. The original action, now solely against Georgia Power, has been administratively closed since the spring of 2001, and the case has not been reopened.
In June 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama entered a consent decree between Alabama Power and the EPA, resolving a portion of the Alabama Power lawsuit relating to the alleged NSR violations at Plant Miller. The consent decree required Alabama Power to pay $100,000 to resolve the government’s claim for a civil penalty and to donate $4.9 million of sulfur dioxide emission allowances to a nonprofit charitable organization. It also formalized specific emissions reductions to be accomplished by Alabama Power, consistent with other Clean Air Act programs that require emissions reductions. In August 2006, the district court in Alabama granted Alabama Power’s motion for summary judgment and entered final judgment in favor of Alabama Power on the EPA’s claims related to all of the remaining plants: Plants Barry, Gaston, Gorgas, and Greene County.
The plaintiffs appealed the district court’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, where it was stayed, pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in a similar case against Duke Energy. The Supreme Court issued its decision in the Duke Energy case in April 2007, and in December 2007, the Eleventh Circuit vacated the district court’s decision in the Alabama Power case and remanded the case back to the district court for consideration of the legal issues in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Duke Energy case. On July 24, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama granted partial summary judgment in favor of Alabama Power with respect to its other affected units regarding the proper legal test for determining whether projects are routine maintenance, repair, and replacement and therefore are excluded from NSR permitting. The decision did not resolve the case, which remains ongoing.
The Company believes that it complied with applicable laws and the EPA regulations and interpretations in effect at the time the work in question took place. The Clean Air Act authorizes maximum civil penalties of $25,000 to $37,500 per day, per violation at each generating unit, depending on the date of the alleged violation. An adverse outcome could require substantial capital expenditures or affect the timing of currently budgeted capital expenditures that cannot be determined at this time and could possibly require payment of substantial penalties. Such expenditures could affect future results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.
Carbon Dioxide Litigation
New York Case
In July 2004, three environmental groups and attorneys general from eight states, each outside of Southern Company’s service territory, and the corporation counsel for New York City filed complaints in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against Southern Company and four other electric power companies. The complaints allege that the companies’ emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, contribute to global warming, which the plaintiffs assert is a public nuisance. Under common law public and private nuisance theories, the plaintiffs seek a judicial order (1) holding each defendant jointly and severally liable for creating, contributing to, and/or maintaining global warming and (2) requiring each of the defendants to cap its emissions of carbon dioxide and then reduce those emissions by a specified percentage each year for at least a decade. The plaintiffs have not, however, requested that damages be awarded in connection with their claims. Southern Company believes these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. In September 2005, the U.S. District Court for the

II-291


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Southern District of New York granted Southern Company’s and the other defendants’ motions to dismiss these cases. The plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in October 2005 and, on September 21, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the district court’s ruling, vacating the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claim, and remanding the case to the district court. On November 5, 2009, the defendants, including Southern Company, sought rehearing en banc, and the court’s ruling is subject to potential appeal. Therefore, the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Kivalina Case
In February 2008, the Native Village of Kivalina and the City of Kivalina filed a suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against several electric utilities (including Southern Company), several oil companies, and a coal company. The plaintiffs are the governing bodies of an Inupiat village in Alaska. The plaintiffs contend that the village is being destroyed by erosion allegedly caused by global warming that the plaintiffs attribute to emissions of greenhouse gases by the defendants. The plaintiffs assert claims for public and private nuisance and contend that some of the defendants have acted in concert and are therefore jointly and severally liable for the plaintiffs’ damages. The suit seeks damages for lost property values and for the cost of relocating the village, which is alleged to be $95 million to $400 million. Southern Company believes that these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. On September 30, 2009, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss the case based on lack of jurisdiction and ruled the claims were barred by the political question doctrine and by the plaintiffs’ failure to establish the standard for determining that the defendants’ conduct caused the injury alleged. On November 5, 2009, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit challenging the district court’s order dismissing the case. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Other Litigation
Common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas emissions have become more frequent, and courts have recently determined that private parties and states have standing to bring such claims. For example, on October 16, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi’s dismissal of private party claims against certain oil, coal, chemical, and utility companies alleging damages as a result of Hurricane Katrina. In reversing the dismissal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that plaintiffs have standing to assert their nuisance, trespass, and negligence claims and none of these claims are barred by the political question doctrine. The Company is not currently a party to this litigation but was named as a defendant in an amended complaint which was rendered moot in August 2007 by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi when such court dismissed the original matter. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Environmental Remediation
The Company must comply with environmental laws and regulations that cover the handling and disposal of waste and releases of hazardous substances. Under these various laws and regulations, the Company may also incur substantial costs to clean up properties. The Company received authority from the Florida PSC to recover approved environmental compliance costs through the environmental cost recovery clause. The Florida PSC reviews costs and adjusts rates up or down annually.
The Company’s environmental remediation liability includes estimated costs of environmental remediation projects of approximately $65.2 million as of December 31, 2009. These estimated costs relate to site closure criteria by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) for potential impacts to soil and groundwater from herbicide applications at the Company’s substations. The schedule for completion of the remediation projects will be subject to FDEP approval. The projects have been approved by the Florida PSC for recovery through the Company’s environmental cost recovery clause; therefore, there is no impact to net income as a result of these liabilities.
The final outcome of these matters cannot now be determined. However, based on the currently known conditions at these sites and the nature and extent of activities relating to these sites, the Company does not believe that additional liabilities, if any, at these sites would be material to the Company’s financial statements.

II-292


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
FERC Matters
Market-Based Rate Authority
The Company has authorization from the FERC to sell power to non-affiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices. Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based contract with an affiliate.
In December 2004, the FERC initiated a proceeding to assess Southern Company’s generation market power within its retail service territory. The ability to charge market-based rates in other markets was not an issue in the proceeding. Any new market-based rate sales by the Company in Southern Company’s retail service territory entered into during a 15-month refund period that ended in May 2006 could have been subject to refund to a cost-based rate level.
On December 23, 2009, Southern Company and the FERC trial staff reached an agreement in principle that would resolve the proceeding in its entirety. The agreement does not reflect any finding or suggestion that the Company possesses or has exercised any market power. The agreement likewise does not require the Company to make any refunds related to sales during the 15-month refund period. Under the agreement, the Company will donate $0.1 million to nonprofit organizations in the State of Florida for the purpose of offsetting the electricity bills of low-income retail customers. The agreement is subject to review and approval by the FERC.
Intercompany Interchange Contract
The Company’s generation fleet is operated under the Intercompany Interchange Contract (IIC), as approved by the FERC. In May 2005, the FERC initiated a new proceeding to examine (1) the provisions of the IIC among the traditional operating companies (including the Company), Southern Power, and SCS, as agent, under the terms of which the power pool of Southern Company is operated, (2) whether any parties to the IIC have violated the FERC’s standards of conduct applicable to utility companies that are transmission providers, and (3) whether Southern Company’s code of conduct defining Southern Power as a “system company” rather than a “marketing affiliate” is just and reasonable. In connection with the formation of Southern Power, the FERC authorized Southern Power’s inclusion in the IIC in 2000. The FERC also previously approved Southern Company’s code of conduct.
In October 2006, the FERC issued an order accepting a settlement resolving the proceeding subject to Southern Company’s agreement to accept certain modifications to the settlement’s terms. Southern Company notified the FERC that it accepted the modifications. The modifications largely involve functional separation and information restrictions related to marketing activities conducted on behalf of Southern Power. In November 2006, Southern Company filed with the FERC a compliance plan in connection with the order. In April 2007, the FERC approved, with certain modifications, the plan submitted by Southern Company. Implementation of the plan did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements. In November 2007, Southern Company notified the FERC that the plan had been implemented. In December 2008, the FERC division of audits issued for public comment its final audit report pertaining to compliance implementation and related matters. No comments were submitted challenging the audit report’s findings of Southern Company’s compliance. The proceeding remains open pending a decision from the FERC regarding the audit report.
Retail Regulatory Matters
General
The Company’s rates and charges for service to retail customers are subject to the regulatory oversight of the Florida PSC. The Company’s rates are a combination of base rates and several separate cost recovery clauses for specific categories of costs. These separate cost recovery clauses address such items as fuel and purchased energy costs, purchased power capacity costs, energy conservation, and demand side management programs, and the costs of compliance with environmental laws and regulations. Costs not addressed through one of the specific cost recovery clauses are recovered through the Company’s base rates.
On November 2, 2009, the Florida PSC approved the Company’s annual rate requests for its purchased power capacity, energy conservation, and environmental compliance cost recovery factors for 2010. On December 1, 2009, the Florida PSC approved the Company’s annual rate request for its 2010 fuel cost recovery factor, which includes both fuel and purchased energy costs. The net effect of the approved changes to the Company’s cost recovery factors for 2010 is a 3.9% rate increase for residential customers using 1,000 kilowatt-hours per month. The billing factors for 2010 are intended to allow the Company to recover projected 2010 costs as well as refund or collect the 2009 over or under recovered amounts in 2010. Cost recovery revenues, as recorded on the financial

II-293


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
statements, are adjusted for differences in actual recoverable costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Accordingly, changing the billing factors has no significant effect on the Company’s revenues or net income, but does impact annual cash flow.
Fuel Cost Recovery
The Company petitions for fuel cost recovery rates to be approved by the Florida PSC on an annual basis. The fuel cost recovery rates include the costs of fuel and purchased energy. The Company continuously monitors the over or under recovered fuel cost balance in light of the inherent variability in fuel costs. If the projected fuel cost over or under recovery exceeds 10% of the projected fuel revenue applicable for the period, the Company is required to notify the Florida PSC and indicate if an adjustment to the fuel cost recovery is being requested. As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company had an under recovered fuel balance of approximately $2.4 million and $96.7 million, respectively, which is included in current assets in the balance sheets.
Purchased Power Capacity Recovery
The Florida PSC allows the Company to recover its costs for capacity purchased from other power producers under PPAs through a separate cost recovery component or factor in the Company’s retail energy rates. Like the other specific cost recovery factors included in the Company’s retail energy rates, the rates for purchased capacity are set annually on a calendar year basis. When the Company enters into a new PPA, it is reviewed and approved by the Florida PSC for cost recovery purposes. As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company had an over recovered purchased power capacity balance of approximately $1.5 million and $0.3 million, respectively, which is included in other regulatory liabilities, current in the balance sheets.
Environmental Cost Recovery
The Florida Legislature adopted legislation for an environmental cost recovery clause, which allows an electric utility to petition the Florida PSC for recovery of prudent environmental compliance costs that are not being recovered through base rates or any other recovery mechanism. Such environmental costs include operation and maintenance expense, emission allowance expense, depreciation, and a return on invested capital. This legislation also allows recovery of costs incurred as a result of an agreement between the Company and the FDEP for the purpose of ensuring compliance with ozone ambient air quality standards adopted by the EPA. In August 2007, the Florida PSC voted to approve a stipulation among the Company, the Office of Public Counsel, and the Florida Industrial Power Users Group regarding the Company’s plan for complying with certain federal and state regulations addressing air quality. The Company’s environmental compliance plan as filed in March 2007 contemplates implementation of specific projects identified in the plan from 2007 through 2018. The stipulation covers all elements of the current plan that are scheduled to be implemented in the 2007 through 2011 timeframe. On April 1, 2009, the Company filed an update to the plan which was approved by the Florida PSC on November 2, 2009. The Florida PSC acknowledged that the costs associated with the Company’s Clean Air Interstate Rule and Clean Air Visibility Rule compliance plan are eligible for recovery through the environmental cost recovery clause. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the over recovered environmental balance was approximately $11.7 million and $71 thousand, respectively, which is included in other regulatory liabilities, current in the balance sheets.
4. JOINT OWNERSHIP AGREEMENTS
The Company and Mississippi Power jointly own Plant Daniel Units 1 and 2, which together represent capacity of 1,000 MWs. Plant Daniel is a generating plant located in Jackson County, Mississippi. In accordance with the operating agreement, Mississippi Power acts as the Company’s agent with respect to the construction, operation, and maintenance of these units.
The Company and Georgia Power jointly own the 818 MWs capacity Plant Scherer Unit 3. Plant Scherer is a generating plant located near Forsyth, Georgia. In accordance with the operating agreement, Georgia Power acts as the Company’s agent with respect to the construction, operation, and maintenance of the unit.
The Company’s pro rata share of expenses related to both plants is included in the corresponding operating expense accounts in the statements of income and the Company is responsible for providing its own financing.

II-294


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
At December 31, 2009, the Company’s percentage ownership and its investment in these jointly owned facilities were as follows:
         
  Plant Scherer Plant Daniel
  Unit 3 (coal) Units 1 & 2 (coal)
  (in thousands)
Plant in service $242,078(a) $262,315 
Accumulated depreciation  100,242   150,190 
Construction work in progress  70,657   1,542 
Ownership  25%  50%
 
(a)Includes net plant acquisition adjustment of $3.1 million.
5. INCOME TAXES
Southern Company files a consolidated federal income tax return and combined State of Mississippi and State of Georgia income tax returns. Under a joint consolidated income tax allocation agreement, each subsidiary’s current and deferred tax expense is computed on a stand-alone basis and no subsidiary is allocated more expense than would be paid if it filed a separate income tax return. In accordance with Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regulations, each company is jointly and severally liable for the tax liability.
Current and Deferred Income Taxes
Details of income tax provisions are as follows:
             
  2009 2008 2007
  (in thousands)
Federal -            
Current $62,980  $26,592  $51,321 
Deferred  (14,453)  21,481   (9,431)
 
   48,527   48,073   41,890 
 
State -            
Current  6,590   3,563   6,581 
Deferred  (2,092)  2,467   (1,388)
 
   4,498   6,030   5,193 
 
Total $53,025  $54,103  $47,083 
 

II-295


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The tax effects of temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and their respective tax bases, which give rise to deferred tax assets and liabilities, are as follows:
         
  2009 2008
  (in thousands)
Deferred tax liabilities-        
Accelerated depreciation $332,971  $284,653 
Fuel recovery clause  965   39,176 
Pension and other employee benefits  15,539   15,356 
Regulatory assets associated with employee benefit obligations  37,768   34,787 
Regulatory assets associated with asset retirement obligations  5,106   4,877 
Other  9,084   3,747 
 
Total  401,433   382,596 
 
Deferred tax assets-        
Federal effect of state deferred taxes  13,076   14,039 
Postretirement benefits  18,465   17,428 
Pension and other employee benefits  41,124   38,156 
Property reserve  10,642   4,872 
Other comprehensive loss  1,546   3,097 
Asset retirement obligations  5,106   4,877 
Other  16,995   7,003 
 
Total  106,954   89,472 
 
Net deferred tax liabilities  294,479   293,124 
Less current portion, net  2,926   (38,770)
 
Accumulated deferred income taxes in the balance sheets $297,405  $254,354 
 
At December 31, 2009, the tax-related regulatory assets to be recovered from customers was $39.0 million. These assets are attributable to tax benefits flowed through to customers in prior years and to taxes applicable to capitalized allowance for funds used during construction. At December 31, 2009, the tax-related regulatory liabilities to be credited to customers was $11.4 million. These liabilities are attributable to deferred taxes previously recognized at rates higher than the current enacted tax law and to unamortized investment tax credits.
In accordance with regulatory requirements, deferred investment tax credits are amortized over the lives of the related property with such amortization normally applied as a credit to reduce depreciation in the statements of income. Credits amortized in this manner amounted to $1.6 million in 2009, $1.7 million in 2008, and $1.7 million in 2007. At December 31, 2009, all investment tax credits available to reduce federal income taxes payable had been utilized.
Effective Tax Rate
A reconciliation of the federal statutory income tax rate to the effective income tax rate is as follows:
             
  2009 2008 2007
 
Federal statutory rate  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%
State income tax, net of federal deduction  1.7   2.5   2.5 
Non-deductible book depreciation  0.3   0.0   0.4 
Difference in prior years’ deferred and current tax rate  (0.4)  (0.5)  (0.6)
Production activities deduction  (0.9)  0.1   (1.4)
Allowance for funds used during construction  (4.9)  (2.2)  (0.6)
Other, net  0.3   (0.8)  (0.4)
 
Effective income tax rate  31.1%  34.1%  34.9%
 
The decrease in the 2009 effective tax rate is primarily the result of an increase in nontaxable allowance for equity funds used during construction.

II-296


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 created a tax deduction for a portion of income attributable to U.S. production activities as defined in the Internal Revenue Code Section 199 (production activities deduction). The deduction is equal to a stated percentage of qualified production activities net income. The percentage is phased in over the years 2005 through 2010 with a 3% rate applicable to the years 2005 and 2006, a 6% rate applicable for the years 2007 through 2009, and a 9% rate thereafter. The IRS has not clearly defined a methodology for calculating this deduction. However, Southern Company reached an agreement with the IRS on a calculation methodology and signed a closing agreement in December 2008. Therefore, in 2008, the Company reversed the unrecognized tax benefit related to the calculation methodology and adjusted the deduction for all previous years to conform to the agreement which resulted in a decrease in the 2008 deduction when compared to the 2007 deduction. Certain aspects of the production activities deduction remain unresolved. The net impact of the reversal of the unrecognized tax benefits combined with the application of the new methodology had no material effect on the Company’s financial statements.
Unrecognized Tax Benefits
For 2009, the total amount of unrecognized tax benefits increased by $1.3 million, resulting in a balance of $1.6 million as of December 31, 2009.
Changes during the year in unrecognized tax benefits were as follows:
             
  2009 2008 2007
  (thousands)
Unrecognized tax benefits at beginning of year $294  $887  $211 
Tax positions from current periods  455   93   469 
Tax positions from prior periods  890   11   207 
Reductions due to settlements     (697)   
Reductions due to expired statute of limitations         
 
Balance at end of year $1,639  $294  $887 
 
The tax positions from current periods increase for 2009 relate primarily to the production activities deduction tax position and other miscellaneous uncertain tax positions. The tax positions increase from prior periods for 2009 relates primarily to the production activities deduction tax position. See “Effective Tax Rate” above for additional information.
Impact on the Company’s effective tax rate, if recognized, is as follows:
             
  2009 2008 2007
  (thousands)
Tax positions impacting the effective tax rate $1,639  $294  $887 
Tax positions not impacting the effective tax rate         
 
Balance of unrecognized tax benefits $1,639  $294  $887 
 
Accrued interest for unrecognized tax benefits was as follows:
             
  2009 2008 2007
  (thousands)
Interest accrued at beginning of year $17  $58  $5 
Interest reclassified due to settlements     (54)   
Interest accrued during the year  73   13   53 
 
Balance at end of year $90  $17  $58 
 
The Company classifies interest on tax uncertainties as interest expense. The Company did not accrue any penalties on uncertain tax positions.
It is reasonably possible that the amount of the unrecognized benefit with respect to the majority of the Company’s unrecognized tax positions will significantly increase or decrease within the next 12 months. The possible conclusion or settlement of state audits could impact the balances significantly. At this time, an estimate of the range of reasonably possible outcomes cannot be determined.
The IRS has audited and closed all tax returns prior to 2004. The audits for the state returns have either been concluded, or the statute of limitations has expired, for years prior to 2006.

II-297


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
6. FINANCING
Securities Due Within One Year
At December 31, 2009, the Company had $140 million of senior notes due to mature within one year. The date of maturity for these notes is June 2010.
Bank Term Loans
At December 31, 2009, the Company had a $110 million bank loan outstanding, which matures in April 2011.
Senior Notes
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company had a total of $727.5 million and $588.7 million of senior notes outstanding, respectively. These senior notes are effectively subordinate to all secured debt of the Company which totaled approximately $41 million at December 31, 2009.
Pollution Control Revenue Bonds
Pollution control obligations represent loans to the Company from public authorities of funds derived from sales by such authorities of revenue bonds issued to finance pollution control facilities. The Company has $288.0 million of outstanding pollution control revenue bonds and is required to make payments sufficient for the authorities to meet principal and interest requirements of such bonds. Proceeds from certain issuances are restricted until qualifying expenditures are incurred.
Outstanding Classes of Capital Stock
The Company currently has preferred stock, Class A preferred stock, preference stock, and common stock authorized. The Company’s preferred stock and Class A preferred stock, without preference between classes, rank senior to the Company’s preference stock and common stock with respect to payment of dividends and voluntary or involuntary dissolution. No shares of preferred stock or Class A preferred stock were outstanding at December 31, 2009. The Company’s preference stock ranks senior to the common stock with respect to the payment of dividends and voluntary or involuntary dissolution. Certain series of the preference stock are subject to redemption at the option of the Company on or after a specified date (typically five or 10 years after the date of issuance) at a redemption price equal to 100% of the liquidation amount of the preference stock. In addition, one series of the preference stock may be redeemed earlier at a redemption price equal to 100% of the liquidation amount plus a make-whole premium based on the present value of the liquidation amount and future dividends.
In January 2009, the Company issued to Southern Company 1,350,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, without par value, and realized proceeds of $135 million. On January 25, 2010, the Company issued to Southern Company 500,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, without par value, and realized proceeds of $50 million. The proceeds were used to repay a portion of the Company’s short-term debt and for other general corporate purposes, including the Company’s continuous construction program.
Dividend Restrictions
The Company can only pay dividends to Southern Company out of retained earnings or paid-in-capital.
Assets Subject to Lien
The Company has granted a lien on its property at Plant Daniel in connection with the issuance of two series of pollution control revenue bonds with an outstanding principal amount of $41 million.
There are no agreements or other arrangements among the affiliated companies under which the assets of one company have been pledged or otherwise made available to satisfy obligations of Southern Company or any of its subsidiaries.
Bank Credit Arrangements
At December 31, 2009, the Company had $220 million of lines of credit with banks, all of which remained unused. These bank credit arrangements will expire in 2010 and $70 million contain provisions allowing one-year term loans executable at expiration. Of the $220 million, $69 million provides support for variable rate pollution control bonds, and $151 million provides liquidity support for

II-298


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
the Company’s commercial paper program and other general corporate purposes, including the Company’s continuous construction program. Commitment fees average less than3/4 of 1% for the Company.
Certain credit arrangements contain covenants that limit the level of indebtedness to capitalization to 65%, as defined in the arrangements. At December 31, 2009, the Company was in compliance with these covenants.
In addition, certain credit arrangements contain cross default provisions to other indebtedness that would trigger an event of default if the Company defaulted on indebtedness over a specified threshold. The cross default provisions are restricted only to indebtedness of the Company. The Company is currently in compliance with all such covenants.
The Company borrows primarily through a commercial paper program that has the liquidity support of committed bank credit arrangements. The Company may also borrow through various other arrangements with banks. At December 31, 2009, the Company had $88.9 million of commercial paper outstanding. At December 31, 2008, the Company had $89.9 million of commercial paper and $50 million of short-term bank notes outstanding. During 2009, the peak amount outstanding for short-term debt was $152.1 million and the average amount outstanding was $51.7 million. The peak amount outstanding for short-term debt in 2008 was $141.2 million and the average amount outstanding was $36.9 million. The average annual interest rate on short-term debt was 1.0% and 2.2% for 2009 and 2008, respectively.
7. COMMITMENTS
Construction Program
The Company is engaged in a continuous construction program, the cost of which is currently estimated to total $271.4 million in 2010, $350.2 million in 2011, and $418.5 million in 2012. The construction programs are subject to periodic review and revision, and actual construction costs may vary from these estimates because of numerous factors. These factors include: changes in business conditions; revised load growth estimates; storm impacts; changes in environmental statutes and regulations; changes in FERC rules and regulations; Florida PSC approvals; changes in legislation; the cost and efficiency of construction labor, equipment, and materials; project scope and design changes; and the cost of capital. In addition, there can be no assurance that costs related to capital expenditures will be fully recovered. At December 31, 2009, significant purchase commitments were outstanding in connection with the ongoing construction program.
Included in the amounts above are $113.4 million in 2010, $194.8 million in 2011, and $194.2 million in 2012 for environmental expenditures. The Company does not have any significant new generating capacity under construction. Construction of new transmission and distribution facilities and other capital improvements, including those needed to meet environmental standards for the Company’s existing generation, transmission, and distribution facilities, are ongoing.
Long-Term Service Agreements
The Company has a Long-Term Service Agreement (LTSA) with General Electric (GE) for the purpose of securing maintenance support for a combined cycle generating facility. The LTSA provides that GE will perform all planned inspections on the covered equipment, which generally includes the cost of all labor and materials. GE is also obligated to cover the costs of unplanned maintenance on the covered equipment subject to limits and scope specified in the LTSA.
In general, the LTSA is in effect through two major inspection cycles of the unit. Scheduled payments to GE, which are subject to price escalation, are made at various intervals based on actual operating hours of the unit. Total remaining payments to GE under the LTSA for facilities owned are currently estimated at $59.2 million over the remaining life of the LTSA, which is currently estimated to be up to 8 years. However, the LTSA contains various cancellation provisions at the option of the Company.
Payments made under the LTSA prior to the performance of any planned inspections are recorded as prepayments. These amounts are included in Current Assets and Deferred Charges and Other Assets in the balance sheets for 2009 and 2008, respectively. Inspection costs are capitalized or charged to expense based on the nature of the work performed.

II-299


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Limestone Commitments
As part of the Company’s program to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions from certain of its coal plants, the Company has entered into various long-term commitments for the procurement of limestone to be used in flue gas desulfurization equipment. Limestone contracts are structured with tonnage minimums and maximums in order to account for fluctuations in coal burn and sulfur content. The Company has a minimum contractual obligation of 0.8 million tons equating to approximately $67.7 million, through 2019. Estimated expenditures (based on minimum contracted obligated dollars) over the next five years are $6.0 million in 2010, $6.2 million in 2011, $6.3 million in 2012, $6.5 million in 2013, and $6.7 million in 2014. Limestone costs are recovered through the environmental cost recovery clause.
Fuel and Purchased Power Commitments
To supply a portion of the fuel requirements of the generating plants, the Company has entered into various long-term commitments for the procurement of fossil fuel. In most cases, these contracts contain provisions for price escalations, minimum purchase levels, and other financial commitments. Coal commitments include forward contract purchases for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions allowances. Natural gas purchase commitments contain fixed volumes with prices based on various indices at the time of delivery; amounts included in the chart below represent estimates based on New York Mercantile Exchange future prices at December 31, 2009. Also, the Company has entered into various long-term commitments for the purchase of capacity, electricity, and transmission. The energy-related costs associated with PPAs are recovered through the fuel cost recovery clause. The capacity-related costs associated with PPAs are recovered through the purchased power capacity cost recovery clause.
Total estimated minimum long-term obligations at December 31, 2009 were as follows:
               
  Commitments 
  Purchased Power*  Natural Gas  Coal 
 ��(in thousands) 
2010 $39,432   $112,080   $515,241 
2011  41,185    79,724    75,561 
2012  41,289    57,842     
2013  41,380    47,664     
2014  55,937    53,512     
2015 and thereafter  659,261    130,889     
 
Total $878,484   $481,711   $590,802 
 
*Included above is $69.9 million in obligations with affiliated companies. Certain PPAs are accounted for as operating leases.
Additional commitments for fuel will be required to supply the Company’s future needs.
SCS may enter into various types of wholesale energy and natural gas contracts acting as an agent for the Company and all of the other Southern Company traditional operating companies and Southern Power. Under these agreements, each of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power may be jointly and severally liable. The creditworthiness of Southern Power is currently inferior to the creditworthiness of the traditional operating companies. Accordingly, Southern Company has entered into keep-well agreements with the Company and each of the other traditional operating companies to ensure the Company will not subsidize or be responsible for any costs, losses, liabilities, or damages resulting from the inclusion of Southern Power as a contracting party under these agreements.
Operating Leases
The Company has operating lease agreements with various terms and expiration dates. Total operating lease expenses were $10.1 million, $5.0 million, and $4.7 million for 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively. Included in these lease expenses are rail car lease costs which are charged to fuel inventory and are allocated to fuel expense as the fuel is used. These expenses are then recovered through the Company’s fuel cost recovery clause. The Company’s share of the lease costs charged to fuel inventories was $7.9 million in 2009, $4.0 million in 2008, and $4.4 million in 2007. The Company includes any step rents, escalations, and lease concessions in its computation of minimum lease payments, which are recognized on a straight-line basis over the minimum lease term.

II-300


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
At December 31, 2009, estimated minimum rental commitments for noncancelable operating leases were as follows:
             
  Minimum Lease Payments
  Barges &    
  Rail Cars Other Total
  (in thousands)
2010 $12,380  $2,145  $14,525 
2011  9,768   2,053   11,821 
2012  8,266   452   8,718 
2013  6,925   233   7,158 
2014  5,504   131   5,635 
2015 and thereafter  1,613      1,613 
 
Total $44,456  $5,014  $49,470 
 
The Company and Mississippi Power jointly entered into operating lease agreements for aluminum rail cars for the transportation of coal to Plant Daniel. The Company has the option to purchase the rail cars at the greater of lease termination value or fair market value or to renew the leases at the end of each lease term. The Company and Mississippi Power also have separate lease agreements for other rail cars that do not include purchase options.
The Company entered into operating lease agreements for barges and tow boats for the transport of coal at Plant Crist. The Company has the option to renew the leases at the end of each lease term. No barge lease costs were incurred for 2009, 2008, or 2007.
In addition to rail car leases, the Company has other operating leases for fuel handling equipment at Plant Daniel. The Company’s share of these leases was charged to fuel handling expense in the amount of $0.3 million in 2009. The Company’s annual lease payments for 2010 to 2014 will average approximately $0.2 million.
8. STOCK OPTION PLAN
Southern Company provides non-qualified stock options to a large segment of the Company’s employees ranging from line management to executives. As of December 31, 2009, there were 308 current and former employees of the Company participating in the stock option plan, and there were 21 million shares of Southern Company common stock remaining available for awards under this plan. The prices of options granted to date have been at the fair market value of the shares on the dates of grant. Options granted to date become exercisable pro rata over a maximum period of three years from the date of grant. The Company generally recognizes stock option expense on a straight-line basis over the vesting period which equates to the requisite service period; however, for employees who are eligible for retirement the total cost is expensed at the grant date. Options outstanding will expire no later than 10 years after the date of grant, unless terminated earlier by the Southern Company Board of Directors in accordance with the stock option plan. For certain stock option awards a change in control will provide accelerated vesting.
The estimated fair values of stock options granted in 2009, 2008, and 2007 were derived using the Black-Scholes stock option pricing model. Expected volatility was based on historical volatility of Southern Company’s stock over a period equal to the expected term. The Company used historical exercise data to estimate the expected term that represents the period of time that options granted to employees are expected to be outstanding. The risk-free rate was based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant that covers the expected term of the stock options. The following table shows the assumptions used in the pricing model and the weighted average grant-date fair value of stock options granted:
             
Year Ended December 31 2009 2008 2007
 
Expected volatility  15.6%  13.1%  14.8%
Expected term(in years)
  5.0   5.0   5.0 
Interest rate  1.9%  2.8%  4.6%
Dividend yield  5.4%  4.5%  4.3%
Weighted average grant-date fair value $1.80  $2.37  $4.12 

II-301


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The Company’s activity in the stock option plan for 2009 is summarized below:
         
  Shares Subject Weighted Average
  to Option Exercise Price
 
Outstanding at December 31, 2008  1,279,765  $32.25 
Granted  435,820   31.38 
Exercised  (56,735)  24.68 
Cancelled  (729)  35.30 
 
Outstanding at December 31, 2009
  1,658,121  $32.28 
 
Exercisable at December 31, 2009
  994,073  $31.81 
 
The number of stock options vested, and expected to vest in the future, as of December 31, 2009 was not significantly different from the number of stock options outstanding at December 31, 2009 as stated above. As of December 31, 2009, the weighted average remaining contractual term for the options outstanding and options exercisable was 6.4 years and 4.9 years, respectively, and the aggregate intrinsic value for the options outstanding and options exercisable was $3.2 million and $2.4 million, respectively.
As of December 31, 2009, there was $0.2 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to stock option awards not yet vested. That cost is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 10 months.
For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, total compensation cost for stock option awards recognized in income was $0.9 million, $0.8 million, and $1.1 million, respectively, with the related tax benefit also recognized in income of $0.4 million, $0.3 million, and $0.4 million, respectively.
The compensation cost and tax benefits related to the grant and exercise of Southern Company stock options to the Company’s employees are recognized in the Company’s financial statements with a corresponding credit to equity, representing a capital contribution from Southern Company.
The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007 was $0.2 million, $1.3 million, and $3.0 million, respectively. The actual tax benefit realized by the Company for the tax deductions from stock option exercises for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007 totaled $0.1 million, $0.5 million, and $1.1 million, respectively.
9. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
The fair value measurement is based on inputs of observable and unobservable market data that a market participant would use in pricing the asset or liability. The use of observable inputs is maximized where available and the use of unobservable inputs is minimized for fair value measurement and reflects a three-tier fair value hierarchy that prioritizes inputs to valuation techniques used for fair value measurement.
Level 1 consists of observable market data in an active market for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2 consists of observable market data, other than that included in Level 1, that is either directly or indirectly observable.
Level 3 consists of unobservable market data. The input may reflect the assumptions of the Company of what a market participant would use in pricing an asset or liability. If there is little available market data, then the Company’s own assumptions are the best available information.
In the case of multiple inputs being used in a fair value measurement, the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement represents the level in the fair value hierarchy in which the fair value measurement is reported.

II-302


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The fair value measurements performed on a recurring basis and the level of the fair value hierarchy in which they fall at December 31, 2009 are as follows:
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using    
  Quoted Prices      
  in Active Significant    
  Markets for Other Significant  
  Identical Observable Unobservable  
  Assets Inputs Inputs  
At December 31, 2009: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
    (in thousands)
Assets:                
Energy-related derivatives $  $202  $  $202 
Interest rate derivatives     2,934      2,934 
Cash equivalents and restricted cash  9,366         9,366 
 
Total $9,366  $3,136  $  $12,502 
 
                 
Liabilities:                
Energy-related derivatives $  $13,889  $  $13,889 
 
Energy-related derivatives and interest rate derivatives primarily consist of over-the-counter contracts. See Note 10 for additional information. The cash equivalents and restricted cash consist of securities with original maturities of 90 days or less. These financial instruments and investments are valued primarily using the market approach.
As of December 31, 2009, the fair value measurements of investments calculated at net asset value per share (or its equivalent), as well as the nature and risks of those investments, are as follows:
                 
      Unfunded Redemption Redemption
As of December 31, 2009: Fair Value Commitments Frequency Notice Period
  (in thousands)          
Cash equivalents and restricted cash:                
Money market funds $9,366  None Daily Not applicable
The money market funds are short-term investments of excess funds in various money market mutual funds, which are portfolios of short-term debt securities. The money market funds are regulated by the SEC and typically receive the highest rating from credit rating agencies. Regulatory and rating agency requirements for money market funds include minimum credit ratings and maximum maturities for individual securities and a maximum weighted average portfolio maturity. Redemptions are available on a same day basis, up to the full amount of the Company investment in the money market funds.
As of December 31, 2009, other financial instruments for which the carrying amount did not equal fair value were as follows:
         
  Carrying Amount Fair Value
   (in thousands) 
Long-term debt:        
2009
 $1,118,914  $1,137,761 
2008 $849,265  $831,763 
The fair values were based on either closing market prices (Level 1) or closing prices of comparable instruments (Level 2).

II-303


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
10. DERIVATIVES
The Company is exposed to market risks, primarily commodity price risk and interest rate risk. To manage the volatility attributable to these exposures, the Company nets its exposures, where possible, to take advantage of natural offsets and enters into various derivative transactions for the remaining exposures pursuant to the Company’s policies in areas such as counterparty exposure and risk management practices. The Company’s policy is that derivatives are to be used primarily for hedging purposes and mandates strict adherence to all applicable risk management policies. Derivative positions are monitored using techniques including, but not limited to, market valuation, value at risk, stress testing, and sensitivity analysis. Derivative instruments are recognized at fair value in the balance sheets as either assets or liabilities.
Energy-Related Derivatives
The Company enters into energy-related derivatives to hedge exposures to electricity, gas, and other fuel price changes. However, due to cost-based rate regulations, the Company has limited exposure to market volatility in commodity fuel prices and prices of electricity. The Company manages fuel-hedging programs, implemented per the guidelines of the Florida PSC, through the use of financial derivative contracts.
To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in electricity prices, the Company enters into physical fixed-price contracts for the purchase and sale of electricity through the wholesale electricity market. To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in gas prices, the Company may enter into fixed-price contracts for natural gas purchases; however, a significant portion of contracts are priced at market.
Energy-related derivative contracts are accounted for in one of two methods:
Regulatory Hedges- Energy-related derivative contracts which are designated as regulatory hedges relate primarily to the Company’s fuel hedging programs, where gains and losses are initially recorded as regulatory liabilities and assets, respectively, and then are included in fuel expense as the underlying fuel is used in operations and ultimately recovered through the fuel cost recovery clause.
Not Designated- Gains and losses on energy-related derivative contracts that are not designated or fail to qualify as hedges are recognized in the statements of income as incurred.
Some energy-related derivative contracts require physical delivery as opposed to financial settlement, and this type of derivative is both common and prevalent within the electric industry. When an energy-related derivative contract is settled physically, any cumulative unrealized gain or loss is reversed and the contract price is recognized in the respective line item representing the actual price of the underlying goods being delivered.
At December 31, 2009, the net volume of energy-related derivative contracts for natural gas positions for the Company, together with the longest hedge date over which it is hedging its exposure to the variability in future cash flows for forecasted transactions and the longest date for derivatives not designated as hedges, were as follows:
     
Net Purchased Longest Hedge Longest Non-Hedge
mmBtu* Date Date
(in thousands)    
11,000 2014 
*mmBtu — million British thermal units
Interest Rate Derivatives
The Company also enters into interest rate derivatives, which include forward-starting interest rate swaps, to hedge exposure to changes in interest rates. Derivatives related to existing variable rate securities or forecasted transactions are accounted for as cash flow hedges. The derivatives employed as hedging instruments are structured to minimize ineffectiveness.
For cash flow hedges, the fair value gains or losses are recorded in OCI and are reclassified into earnings at the same time the hedged transactions affect earnings.

II-304


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
At December 31, 2009, the Company had outstanding interest rate derivatives designated as cash flow hedges on forecasted debt as follows:
                 
      Weighted     Fair Value
      Average     Gain (Loss)
Notional Variable Rate Fixed Rate Hedge Maturity December 31,
Amount Received Paid Date 2009
(in thousands)             (in thousands)
$100,000 3-month LIBOR  3.79% April 2020 $2,934 
The estimated pre-tax losses that will be reclassified from OCI to interest expense for the next 12-month period ending December 31, 2010 are $0.9 million. The Company has deferred gains and losses that are expected to be amortized into earnings through 2018.
Derivative Financial Statement Presentation and Amounts
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the fair value of energy-related derivatives and interest rate derivatives was reflected in the balance sheets as follows:
                         
 Asset Derivatives Liability Derivatives
  Balance Sheet         Balance Sheet  
Derivative Category Location 2009 2008 Location 20092008
      (in thousands)     (in thousands)
Derivatives designated as hedging
instruments for regulatory purposes
                        
Energy-related derivatives: Other current
assets
 $142  $1,017  Liabilities from risk
   management activities
 $9,442  $26,928 
  Other deferred
charges and assets
  48   54  Other deferred
   credits and liabilities
  4,447   5,305 
 
Total derivatives designated as hedging
instruments for regulatory purposes
     $190  $1,071      $13,889  $32,233 
 
 
Derivatives designated as hedging
instruments in cash flow hedges
                        
Interest rate derivatives: Other current
assets
 $2,934  $  Liabilities from risk
   management activities
 $  $ 
 
 
Derivatives not designated as hedging
instruments
                        
Energy-related derivatives: Other current
assets
 $12  $  Liabilities from risk
   management activities
 $  $ 
 
 
Total
     $3,136  $1,071      $13,889  $32,233 
 
All derivative instruments are measured at fair value. See Note 9 for additional information.

II-305


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the pre-tax effect of unrealized derivative gains (losses) arising from energy-related derivative instruments designated as regulatory hedging instruments and deferred on the balance sheets were as follows:
                         
  Unrealized Losses Unrealized Gains
  Balance Sheet         Balance Sheet    
Derivative Category Location 2009 2008 Location 2009 2008
      (in thousands)     (in thousands)
Energy-related derivatives: Other regulatory
  assets, current
 $(9,442) $(26,928) Other regulatory
   liabilities, current
 $142  $1,017 
  Other regulatory
   assets, deferred
  (4,447)  (5,305) Other regulatory
   liabilities, deferred
  48   54 
 
Total energy-related derivative gains (losses)     $(13,889) $(32,233)     $190  $1,071 
 
For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, the pre-tax effect of interest rate derivatives designated as cash flow hedging instruments on the statements of income were as follows:
                             
  Gain (Loss) Recognized in Gain (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated
Derivatives in Cash Flow OCI on Derivative OCI into Income (Effective Portion)
Hedging Relationships (Effective Portion)     Amount
              Statements of      
Derivative Category 2009 2008 2007 Income Location 2009 2008 2007
  (in thousands)     (in thousands)
Interest rate derivatives $2,934  $(2,792) $602  Interest expense $(1,085) $(949) $(696)
 
There was no material ineffectiveness recorded in earnings for any period presented.
For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, the pre-tax effect of energy-related derivatives not designated as hedging instruments on the statements of income were immaterial.
Contingent Features
The Company does not have any credit arrangements that would require material changes in payment schedules or terminations as a result of a credit rating downgrade. There are certain derivatives that could require collateral, but not accelerated payment, in the event of various credit rating changes of certain affiliated companies. At December 31, 2009, the fair value of derivative liabilities with contingent features was $3.1 million.
At December 31, 2009, the Company had no collateral posted with its derivative counterparties; however, because of the joint and several liability features underlying these derivatives, the maximum potential collateral requirements arising from the credit-risk-related contingent features, at a rating below BBB- and/or Baa3, is $33.3 million.
Currently, the Company has investment grade credit ratings from the major rating agencies with respect to debt and preference stock.
Generally, collateral may be provided by a Southern Company guaranty, letter of credit, or cash. The Company participated in certain agreements that could require collateral in the event that one or more Southern Company system power pool participants has a credit rating change to below investment grade.

II-306


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
11. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL INFORMATION (UNAUDITED)
Summarized quarterly financial data for 2009 and 2008 are as follows:
             
          Net Income After
  Operating Operating Dividends on
Quarter Ended Revenues Income Preference Stock
  (in thousands)
March 2009
 $284,284  $30,914  $16,542 
June 2009
  341,095   54,320   32,269 
September 2009
  377,641   67,392   41,208 
December 2009
  299,209   36,036   21,214 
             
March 2008 $311,535  $40,708  $19,530 
June 2008  349,867   52,314   26,992 
September 2008  421,841   69,039   37,343 
December 2008  303,960   30,628   14,480 
 
The Company’s business is influenced by seasonal weather conditions.

II-307


SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA 2005-2009
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
                     
  2009  2008  2007  2006  2005 
 
Operating Revenues (in thousands)
 $1,302,229  $1,387,203  $1,259,808  $1,203,914  $1,083,622 
Net Income after Dividends on Preference Stock (in thousands)
 $111,233  $98,345  $84,118  $75,989  $75,209 
Cash Dividends on Common Stock (in thousands)
 $89,300  $81,700  $74,100  $70,300  $68,400 
Return on Average Common Equity (percent)
  12.18   12.66   12.32   12.29   12.59 
Total Assets (in thousands)
 $3,293,607  $2,879,025  $2,498,987  $2,340,489  $2,175,797 
Gross Property Additions (in thousands)
 $450,421  $390,744  $239,337  $147,086  $142,583 
 
Capitalization (in thousands):
                    
Common stock equity $1,004,292  $822,092  $731,255  $634,023  $602,344 
Preference stock  97,998   97,998   97,998   53,887   53,891 
Long-term debt  978,914   849,265   740,050   696,098   616,554 
 
Total (excluding amounts due within one year) $2,081,204  $1,769,355  $1,569,303  $1,384,008  $1,272,789 
 
Capitalization Ratios (percent):
                    
Common stock equity  48.3   46.5   46.6   45.8   47.3 
Preference stock  4.7   5.5   6.2   3.9   4.2 
Long-term debt  47.0   48.0   47.2   50.3   48.5 
 
Total (excluding amounts due within one year)  100.0   100.0   100.0   100.0   100.0 
 
Security Ratings:
                    
First Mortgage Bonds -                    
Moody’s              A1 
Standard and Poor’s              A+ 
Fitch              A+ 
Preferred Stock/ Preference Stock -                    
Moody’s  Baa1   Baa1   Baa1   Baa1   Baa1 
Standard and Poor’s  BBB+   BBB+   BBB+   BBB+   BBB+ 
Fitch  A-   A-   A-   A-   A- 
Unsecured Long-Term Debt -                    
Moody’s  A2   A2   A2   A2   A2 
Standard and Poor’s  A   A   A   A   A 
Fitch  A   A   A   A   A 
 
Customers (year-end):
                    
Residential  374,091   373,595   373,036   364,647   354,466 
Commercial  53,272   53,548   53,838   53,466   53,398 
Industrial  279   287   298   295   298 
Other  512   499   491   484   479 
 
Total  428,154   427,929   427,663   418,892   408,641 
 
Employees (year-end)
  1,365   1,342   1,324   1,321   1,335 
 

II-308


SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA 2005-2009 (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2009 Annual Report
                     
  2009  2008  2007  2006  2005 
 
Operating Revenues (in thousands):
                    
Residential $588,073  $581,723  $537,668  $510,995  $465,346 
Commercial  376,125   369,625   329,651   305,049   273,114 
Industrial  138,164   165,564   135,179   132,339   123,044 
Other  4,206   3,854   3,831   3,655   3,355 
 
Total retail  1,106,568   1,120,766   1,006,329   952,038   864,859 
Wholesale — non-affiliates  94,105   97,065   83,514   87,142   84,346 
Wholesale — affiliates  32,095   106,989   113,178   118,097   91,352 
 
Total revenues from sales of electricity  1,232,768   1,324,820   1,203,021   1,157,277   1,040,557 
Other revenues  69,461   62,383   56,787   46,637   43,065 
 
Total $1,302,229  $1,387,203  $1,259,808  $1,203,914  $1,083,622 
 
Kilowatt-Hour Sales (in thousands):
                    
Residential  5,254,491   5,348,642   5,477,111   5,425,491   5,319,630 
Commercial  3,896,105   3,960,923   3,970,892   3,843,064   3,735,776 
Industrial  1,727,106   2,210,597   2,048,389   2,136,439   2,160,760 
Other  25,121   23,237   24,496   23,886   22,730 
 
Total retail  10,902,823   11,543,399   11,520,888   11,428,880   11,238,896 
Wholesale — non-affiliates  1,813,592   1,816,839   2,227,026   2,079,165   2,295,850 
Wholesale — affiliates  870,470   1,871,158   2,884,440   2,937,735   1,976,368 
 
Total  13,586,885   15,231,396   16,632,354   16,445,780   15,511,114 
 
Average Revenue Per Kilowatt-Hour (cents):
                    
Residential  11.19   10.88   9.82   9.42   8.75 
Commercial  9.65   9.33   8.30   7.94   7.31 
Industrial  8.00   7.49   6.60   6.19   5.69 
Total retail  10.15   9.71   8.73   8.33   7.70 
Wholesale  4.70   5.53   3.85   4.09   4.11 
Total sales  9.07   8.70   7.23   7.04   6.71 
Residential Average Annual Kilowatt-Hour Use Per Customer
  14,049   14,274   14,755   15,032   15,181 
Residential Average Annual Revenue Per Customer
 $1,572  $1,552  $1,448  $1,416  $1,328 
Plant Nameplate Capacity Ratings (year-end) (megawatts)
  2,659   2,659   2,659   2,659   2,712 
Maximum Peak-Hour Demand (megawatts):
                    
Winter  2,310   2,360   2,215   2,195   2,124 
Summer  2,538   2,533   2,626   2,479   2,433 
Annual Load Factor (percent)
  53.8   56.7   55.0   57.9   57.7 
Plant Availability Fossil-Steam (percent)
  89.7   88.6   93.4   91.3   89.7 
 
Source of Energy Supply (percent):
                    
Coal  61.7   77.3   81.8   82.5   79.7 
Gas  28.0   15.3   13.6   12.4   13.1 
Purchased power -                    
From non-affiliates  2.2   2.6   1.6   1.9   2.8 
From affiliates  8.1   4.8   3.0   3.2   4.4 
 
Total  100.0   100.0   100.0   100.0   100.0 
 

II-309


MISSISSIPPI POWER COMPANY
FINANCIAL SECTION

II-310


MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The management of Mississippi Power Company (the “Company”) is responsible for establishing and maintaining an adequate system of internal control over financial reporting as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). A control system can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.
Under management’s supervision, an evaluation of the design and effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was conducted based on the framework inInternal Control—Integrated Frameworkissued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this evaluation, management concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2009.
This Annual Report does not include an attestation report of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation by the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit the Company to provide only management’s report in this Annual Report.
/s/ Anthony J. Topazi
Anthony J. Topazi
President and Chief Executive Officer
/s/ Frances Turnage
Frances Turnage
Vice President, Treasurer, and Chief Financial Officer
February 25, 2010

II-311


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Mississippi Power Company
We have audited the accompanying balance sheets and statements of capitalization of Mississippi Power Company (the “Company”) (a wholly owned subsidiary of Southern Company) as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the related statements of income, comprehensive income, common stockholder’s equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2009. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such financial statements (pages II-339 to II-380) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Mississippi Power Company at December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2009, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Atlanta, Georgia
February 25, 2010

II-312


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
OVERVIEW
Business Activities
Mississippi Power Company (the Company) operates as a vertically integrated utility providing electricity to retail customers within its traditional service area located within the State of Mississippi and to wholesale customers in the Southeast.
Many factors affect the opportunities, challenges, and risks of the Company’s business of selling electricity. These factors include the ability to maintain a constructive regulatory environment, to maintain energy sales given the effects of the recession, and to effectively manage and secure timely recovery of rising costs. The Company has various regulatory mechanisms that operate to address cost recovery.
Appropriately balancing required costs and capital expenditures with reasonable retail rates will continue to challenge the Company for the foreseeable future. Hurricane Katrina, the worst natural disaster in the Company’s history, hit the Gulf Coast of Mississippi in August 2005, causing substantial damage to the Company’s service territory. All of the Company’s 195,000 customers were without service immediately after the storm. Through a coordinated effort with Southern Company, as well as non-affiliated companies, the Company restored power to all who could receive it within 12 days. However, due to obstacles in the rebuilding process coupled with the recessionary economy, as of December 31, 2009, the Company had over 8,800 fewer retail customers as compared to pre-storm levels. See Note 1 to the financial statements under “Government Grants” and Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Storm Damage Cost Recovery” for additional information.
The Company’s retail base rates are set under the Performance Evaluation Plan (PEP), a rate plan approved by the Mississippi Public Service Commission (PSC). PEP was designed with the objective to reduce the impact of rate changes on the customer and provide incentives for the Company to keep customer prices low and customer satisfaction and reliability high.
Key Performance Indicators
In striving to maximize shareholder value while providing cost-effective energy to customers, the Company continues to focus on several key indicators. These indicators are used to measure the Company’s performance for customers and employees.
In recognition that the Company’s long-term financial success is dependent upon how well it satisfies its customers’ needs, the Company’s retail base rate mechanism, PEP, includes performance indicators that directly tie customer service indicators to the Company’s allowed return. PEP measures the Company’s performance on a 10-point scale as a weighted average of results in three areas: average customer price, as compared to prices of other regional utilities (weighted at 40%); service reliability, measured in outage minutes per customer (40%); and customer satisfaction, measured in a survey of residential customers (20%). See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Performance Evaluation Plan” for more information on PEP.
In addition to the PEP performance indicators, the Company focuses on other performance measures, including broader measures of customer satisfaction, plant availability, system reliability, and net income after dividends on preferred stock. The Company’s financial success is directly tied to the satisfaction of its customers. Management uses customer satisfaction surveys to evaluate the Company’s results. Peak season equivalent forced outage rate (Peak Season EFOR) is an indicator of plant availability and efficient generation fleet operations during the months when generation needs are greatest. The rate is calculated by dividing the number of hours of forced outages by total generation hours. The actual EFOR performance for 2009 was the best in the history of the Company. Net income after dividends on preferred stock is the primary measure of the Company’s financial performance. Recognizing the critical role in the Company’s success played by the Company’s employees, employee-related measures are a significant management focus. These measures include safety and inclusion. The 2009 safety performance of the Company was the third best in the history of the Company with an Occupational Safety and Health Administration Incidence Rate of 0.62. This achievement resulted in the Company being recognized as one of the top in safety performance among all utilities in the Southeastern Electric Exchange. Inclusion initiatives resulted in performance at target levels for the year.

II-313


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The Company’s 2009 results compared with its targets for some of these key indicators are reflected in the following chart.
         
  2009  2009 
  Target  Actual 
Key Performance Indicator Performance  Performance 
 
Customer Satisfaction
 Top quartile in customer
surveys
 Top quartile
Peak Season EFOR
 3.0% or less 0.76%
Net income after dividends on preferred stock
 $83.5 million $85.0 million
See RESULTS OF OPERATIONS herein for additional information on the Company’s financial performance. The performance achieved in 2009 reflects the continued emphasis that management places on all of these indicators, as well as the commitment shown by employees in achieving or exceeding management’s expectations.
Earnings
The Company’s net income after dividends on preferred stock was $85.0 million in 2009 compared to $86.0 million in 2008. The 1.2% decrease in 2009 was primarily the result of decreases in wholesale energy revenues and total other income and (expense) primarily resulting from an increase in interest expense and decreases in contracting work performed for customers, as well as an increase in income tax expense. These decreases in earnings were partially offset by an increase in territorial base revenues primarily due to a wholesale base rate increase effective January 2009 and higher demand as well as a decrease in other non-fuel related expenses. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “FERC Matters” for additional information.
Net income after dividends on preferred stock was $86.0 million in 2008 compared to $84.0 million in 2007. The 2.4% increase in 2008 was primarily the result of an increase in territorial base revenues due to a retail base rate increase effective January 2008 and an increase in wholesale capacity revenues, partially offset by an increase in depreciation and amortization primarily due to the amortization of regulatory items, an increase in non-fuel related expenses, and an increase in charitable contributions. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters” for additional information.
Net income after dividends on preferred stock was $84.0 million in 2007 compared to $82.0 million in 2006. The 2.4% increase in 2007 was primarily the result of an increase in territorial base revenues due to a retail base rate increase effective April 1, 2006, territorial sales growth, and an increase in total other income and (expense) as a result of charitable contributions in 2006. These factors were partially offset by an increase in non-fuel related expenses and an increase in depreciation and amortization expenses.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
A condensed statement of income follows:
                 
      Increase (Decrease)
  Amount from Prior Year
  2009 2009 2008 2007
  (in millions)
Operating revenues $1,149.4  $(107.1) $142.8  $104.5 
 
Fuel  519.7   (66.8)  92.2   55.6 
Purchased power  91.9   (34.6)  30.7   22.6 
Other operations and maintenance  246.8   (13.3)  4.8   18.6 
Depreciation and amortization  70.9   (0.1)  10.7   13.5 
Taxes other than income taxes  64.1   (1.0)  4.8   (0.6)
 
Total operating expenses  993.4   (115.8)  143.2   109.7 
 
Operating income  156.0   8.7   (0.4)  (5.2)
Total other income and (expense)  (19.1)  (7.8)  (1.1)  10.9 
Income taxes  50.2   1.9   (3.4)  3.7 
 
Net income  86.7   (1.0)  1.9   2.0 
Dividends on preferred stock  1.7          
 
Net income after dividends on preferred stock $85.0  $(1.0) $1.9  $2.0 
 

II-314


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Operating Revenues
Details of the Company’s operating revenues in 2009 and the prior two years were as follows:
             
  Amount
  2009 2008 2007
  (in millions)
Retail — prior year $785.4  $727.2  $647.2 
Estimated change in —            
Rates and pricing  0.6   18.8   8.7 
Sales growth (decline)  (1.3)  (1.1)  12.3 
Weather  1.7   (1.8)  (2.5)
Fuel and other cost recovery  4.5   42.3   61.5 
 
Retail — current year  790.9   785.4   727.2 
 
Wholesale revenues —            
Non-affiliates  299.3   353.8   323.1 
Affiliates  44.5   100.9   46.2 
 
Total wholesale revenues  343.8   454.7   369.3 
 
Other operating revenues  14.7   16.4   17.2 
 
Total operating revenues $1,149.4  $1,256.5  $1,113.7 
 
Percent change  (8.5)%  12.8%  10.4%
 
Total retail revenues for 2009 increased 0.7% when compared to 2008 primarily as a result of slightly higher energy sales and fuel revenues. Total retail revenues for 2008 increased 8.0% when compared to 2007 primarily as a result of a retail base rate increase effective in January 2008 and higher fuel revenues. Total retail revenues for 2007 increased 12.4% when compared to 2006 primarily as a result of an increase in territorial sales growth, a retail base rate increase effective in April 2006, and the Environmental Compliance Overview (ECO) Plan rate increase effective in May 2007. See “Energy Sales” below for a discussion of changes in the volume of energy sold, including changes related to sales growth (or decline) and weather.
Electric rates for the Company include provisions to adjust billings for fluctuations in fuel costs, including the energy component of purchased power costs. Under these provisions, fuel revenues generally equal fuel expenses, including the fuel component of purchased power, and do not affect net income. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “PSC Matters — Fuel Cost Recovery” herein for additional information. The fuel and other cost recovery revenues increased in 2009 when compared to 2008 primarily as a result of higher recoverable fuel costs. Recoverable fuel costs include fuel and purchased power expenses reduced by the fuel portion of wholesale revenues from energy sold to customers outside the Company’s service territory. The fuel and other cost recovery revenues increased in 2008 when compared to 2007 primarily as a result of the increase in fuel and purchased power expenses. The fuel and other cost recovery revenues increased in 2007 when compared to 2006 as a result of higher fuel costs.
Wholesale revenues from sales to non-affiliates will vary depending on the market cost of available energy compared to the cost of the Company and Southern Company system-owned generation, demand for energy within the Southern Company service territory, and availability of Southern Company system generation. Wholesale revenues from sales to non-affiliates decreased $54.5 million, or 15.4%, in 2009 as compared to 2008 as a result of a $54.1 million decrease in energy revenues, of which $27.6 million was associated with lower fuel prices and $26.4 million was associated with a decrease in kilowatt-hour (KWH) sales, and a $0.5 million decrease in capacity revenues. Wholesale revenues from sales to non-affiliates increased $30.7 million, or 9.5%, in 2008 as compared to 2007 as a result of a $30.4 million increase in energy revenues, of which $40.4 million was associated with higher fuel prices and a $0.3 million increase in capacity revenues, partially offset by a $10.0 million decrease in KWH sales. Wholesale revenues from sales to non-affiliates increased $54.3 million, or 20.2%, in 2007 as compared to 2006 as a result of a $51.5 million increase in energy revenues, of which $32.0 million was associated with increased KWH sales and $19.5 million was associated with higher fuel prices, and a $2.8 million increase in capacity revenues.

II-315


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Included in wholesale revenues from sales to non-affiliates are revenues from rural electric cooperative associations and municipalities located in southeastern Mississippi. The related revenues increased 1.5%, 8.3%, and 12.6%, in 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively. The 2009 increase was driven by higher demand which was the result of some brief periods of weather extremes and a base rate increase effective in January 2009. The customer demand experienced by these utilities is determined by factors very similar to those experienced by the Company.
Short-term opportunity energy sales are also included in sales for resale to non-affiliates. These opportunity sales are made at market-based rates (MBRs) that generally provide a margin above the Company’s variable cost to produce the energy.
Wholesale revenues from sales to affiliated companies within the Southern Company system will vary from year to year depending on demand, availability and cost of generating resources at each company. These affiliated sales and purchases are made in accordance with the Intercompany Interchange Contract (IIC), as approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Wholesale revenues from sales to affiliated companies decreased 55.9% in 2009 when compared to 2008, increased 118.6% in 2008 when compared to 2007, and decreased 39.5% in 2007 when compared to 2006. These energy sales do not have a significant impact on earnings since the energy is generally sold at marginal cost.
Other operating revenues in 2009 decreased $1.7 million, or 10.6%, from 2008 primarily due to a $1.0 million decrease in transmission revenues. Other operating revenues in 2008 decreased $0.9 million, or 5.0%, from 2007 primarily due to a sale of oil inventory and a customer contract buyout in 2007 totaling $0.9 million. Other operating revenues in 2007 increased $0.5 million, or 2.9%, from 2006 primarily due to a $1.0 million increase in miscellaneous revenues from a sale of oil inventory during the year, partially offset by a $0.6 million decrease in rent from electric property.
Energy Sales
Changes in revenues are influenced heavily by the change in the volume of energy sold from year to year. KWH sales for 2009 and percent change by year were as follows:
                 
  KWHs Percent Change
  2009 2009 2008 2007
  (in millions)            
Residential  2,092   (1.4)%  (0.6)%  0.8%
Commercial  2,851   (0.2)  (0.7)  7.5 
Industrial  4,330   3.4   (3.0)  4.2 
Other  39   0.0   0.3   4.9 
 
Total retail  9,312   1.2   (1.7)  4.4 
 
Wholesale                
Non-affiliated  4,652   (7.3)  (3.3)  12.1 
Affiliated  839   (43.6)  44.9   (38.9)
 
Total wholesale  5,491   (15.6)  4.7   (1.5)
 
Total energy sales  14,803   (5.8)  0.8   2.0 
 
Changes in retail energy sales are comprised of changes in electricity usage by customers, changes in weather, and changes in the number of customers. Residential energy sales decreased 1.4% in 2009 compared to 2008 due to the recessionary economy and a declining number of customers. Residential energy sales decreased 0.6% in 2008 compared to 2007 due to decreased customer usage mainly due to the recessionary economy and unfavorable summer weather. Residential energy sales increased 0.8% in 2007 compared to 2006, primarily due to more favorable weather conditions, which offset slow customer growth.
Commercial energy sales decreased 0.2% in 2009 compared to 2008 due to the recessionary economy and a net decline in commercial customers. Commercial energy sales decreased 0.7% in 2008 compared to 2007 due to unfavorable weather and slower than expected customer growth due to the economy. Commercial energy sales increased 7.5% in 2007 compared to 2006 due to customer growth mainly in the casino and hotel industries.

II-316


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Industrial energy sales increased 3.4% in 2009 compared to 2008 due to increased production of some of the Company’s industrial customers and the impacts of Hurricane Gustav, which negatively impacted industrial energy sales in 2008. Industrial energy sales decreased 3.0% in 2008 compared to 2007 due to lower customer use from the recessionary economy. Industrial energy sales increased 4.2% in 2007 compared to 2006 due to continued recovery after Hurricane Katrina.
Wholesale energy sales to non-affiliates decreased 7.3% and 3.3% and increased 12.1% in 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively. Included in wholesale sales from sales to non-affiliates are sales from rural electric cooperative associations and municipalities located in southeastern Mississippi. Compared to the prior year, KWH sales to these customers remained at the same levels in 2009 despite the recessionary economy and unfavorable weather, decreased 0.9% in 2008 due to slowing growth and unfavorable weather, and increased 4.3% in 2007 due to growth in the service territory. KWH sales to non-territorial customers located outside the Company’s service territory decreased 29.0% in 2009 as compared to 2008 primarily due to fewer short-term opportunity sales related to lower gas prices. KWH sales to non-territorial customers located outside the Company’s service territory decreased 9.6% in 2008 as compared to 2007 primarily due to lower off-system sales. KWH sales to non-territorial customers increased 41.0% in 2007 as compared to 2006 primarily due to more off-system sales. Wholesale sales to non-affiliates will vary depending on the market cost of available energy compared to the cost of the Company and Southern Company system-owned generation, demand for energy within the Southern Company service territory, and availability of Southern Company system generation.
Wholesale energy sales to affiliates decreased 43.6% in 2009 as compared to 2008 primarily due to a decrease in the Company’s generation and an increase in territorial sales, resulting in less capacity available to sell to affiliate companies. Wholesale energy sales to affiliates increased 44.9% in 2008 as compared to 2007 primarily due to the availability of the Company’s lower cost generation resources for sale to affiliated companies. Wholesale energy sales to affiliates decreased 38.9% in 2007 when compared to 2006 primarily due to a decrease in the Company’s generation and an increase in territorial sales, resulting in less capacity available to sell to affiliate companies.
Fuel and Purchased Power Expenses
Fuel costs constitute the single largest expense for the Company. The mix of fuel sources for generation of electricity is determined primarily by demand, the unit cost of fuel consumed, and the availability of generating units. Additionally, the Company purchases a portion of its electricity needs from the wholesale market. Details of the Company’s electricity generated and purchased were as follows:
             
  2009 2008 2007
Total generation(millions of KWHs)
  12,970   14,324   14,119 
Total purchased power(millions of KWHs)
  2,539   2,091   2,084 
 
Sources of generation(percent)
            
Coal  48   67   69 
Gas  52   33   31 
 
Cost of fuel, generated(cents per net KWH)
            
Coal  4.29   3.52   2.92 
Gas  4.43   6.83   6.25 
 
Average cost of fuel, generated(cents per net KWH)
  4.36   4.43   3.78 
Average cost of purchased power(cents per net KWH)
  3.62   6.05   4.60 
 
Fuel and purchased power expenses were $611.6 million in 2009, a decrease of $101.4 million, or 14.2%, below the prior year costs. This decrease was primarily due to a $69.9 million decrease in the cost of fuel and purchased power and a $31.5 million decrease related to total KWHs generated and purchased. Fuel and purchased power expenses were $713.1 million in 2008, an increase of $122.9 million, or 20.8%, above the prior year costs. This increase was primarily due to a $116.5 million increase in the cost of fuel and purchased power and a $6.4 million increase related to total KWHs generated and purchased. Fuel and purchased power expenses were $590.1 million in 2007, an increase of $78.3 million, or 15.3%, above the prior year costs. This increase was primarily due to a $63.8 million increase in the cost of fuel and purchased power and a $14.5 million increase related to total KWHs generated and purchased.

II-317


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Fuel expense decreased $66.8 million in 2009 as compared to 2008. Approximately $8.1 million of the reduction in fuel expenses resulted primarily from lower gas prices and a $58.7 million decrease in generation from Company-owned facilities. Fuel expense increased $92.2 million in 2008 as compared to 2007. Approximately $86.1 million in additional fuel expenses resulted from higher coal, gas, and transportation prices and a $6.1 million increase in generation from Company-owned facilities. Fuel expense increased $55.6 million in 2007 as compared to 2006. Approximately $56.8 million in additional fuel expenses resulted from higher coal, gas, transportation prices, and emissions allowances, which were partially offset by a $1.2 million decrease in generation from Company-owned facilities.
Purchased power expense decreased $34.6 million, or 27.4%, in 2009 when compared to 2008. The decrease was primarily due to a $61.8 million decrease in the cost of purchased power, partially offset by a $27.2 million increase in the amount of energy purchased which was due to lower cost opportunity purchases. Purchased power expense increased $30.7 million, or 32.0%, in 2008 when compared to 2007. The increase was primarily due to a $30.4 million increase in the cost of purchased power. Purchased power expense increased $22.6 million, or 30.9%, in 2007 when compared to 2006. The increase was primarily due to a $7.0 million increase in the cost of purchased power and a $15.6 million increase in the amount of energy purchased which was partially due to a decrease in generation resulting from plant outages. Energy purchases vary from year to year depending on demand and the availability and cost of the Company’s generating resources. These expenses do not have a significant impact on earnings since the energy purchases are generally offset by energy revenues through the Company’s fuel cost recovery clause.
Coal prices continued to be influenced by worldwide demand from developing countries, as well as increased mining and fuel transportation costs. While coal prices reached unprecedented high levels in 2008, the recessionary economy pushed prices downward in 2009. However, the lower prices did not fully offset the higher priced coal already in inventory and under long-term contract. Demand for natural gas in the United States also was affected by the recessionary economy leading to significantly lower natural gas prices.
Fuel expenses generally do not affect net income, since they are offset by fuel revenues under the Company’s fuel cost recovery clause. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “PSC Matters — Fuel Cost Recovery” and Note 1 to the financial statements under “Fuel Costs” for additional information.
Other Operations and Maintenance Expenses
Total other operations and maintenance expenses decreased $13.3 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 primarily due to a decrease of $12.2 million in transmission, distribution, customer service, and administrative and general expenses driven by overall reductions in spending in an effort to offset the effects of the recessionary economy. Also contributing to the decrease was an $8.3 million reduction in generation outage expenses in 2009. These decreases were partially offset by a $3.9 million increase in expenses for the combined cycle long-term service agreement due to a 36% increase in operating hours as a result of lower gas prices. Also offsetting the decrease was $3.4 million resulting from the 2008 reclassification of generation construction screening expenses to a regulatory asset upon the FERC’s acceptance of the wholesale filing in October 2008.
Total other operations and maintenance expenses increased $4.8 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 primarily due to a $6.9 million increase in transmission and distribution expenses, an increase in administrative expenses primarily resulting from the reclassification of System Restoration Rider (SRR) revenues of $3.8 million to expense pursuant to an order from the Mississippi PSC dated January 9, 2009, a $1.9 million increase in generation-related environmental expenses, and a $1.1 million increase in generation operations and outage-related expenses. These increases were partially offset by a $9.3 million reclassification of generation construction screening expenses to a regulatory asset upon the FERC’s acceptance of the wholesale filing in October 2008.
Total other operations and maintenance expenses increased $18.6 million from 2006 to 2007. Other operations expense increased $15.1 million, or 8.8%, in 2007 compared to 2006 primarily as a result of a $4.1 million increase in generation construction screening, a $3.3 million insurance recovery for storm restoration expense recognized in 2006, a $2.1 million increase in employee benefits primarily due to an increase in medical expense, a $2.0 million increase in outside and other contract services, and a $2.0 million increase in scheduled production projects. Maintenance expense increased $3.5 million, or 5.2%, in 2007 when compared to 2006, primarily as a result of a $5.5 million increase in generation maintenance expense primarily due to outage work in 2007, partially offset by a $2.0 million decrease in transmission and distribution maintenance expenses due primarily to the deferral of these expenses pursuant to the regulatory accounting order from the Mississippi PSC.
See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “FERC Matters,” “PSC Matters — System Restoration Rider,” and “PSC Matters — Storm Damage Cost Recovery” herein for additional information.

II-318


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation and amortization expenses decreased $0.1 million in 2009 compared to 2008 primarily due to a $3.1 million decrease in amortization of environmental costs related to the approved ECO Plan, partially offset by a $2.8 million increase in depreciation expense resulting from an increase in plant in service. Depreciation and amortization expenses increased $10.7 million in 2008 compared to 2007 primarily due to a $5.7 million increase in amortization related to a regulatory liability recorded in 2003 that ended in December 2007 in connection with the Mississippi PSC’s accounting order on Plant Daniel capacity, a $2.9 million increase in depreciation expense primarily due to an increase in plant in service, and a $2.4 million increase for amortization of certain reliability-related maintenance costs deferred in 2007 in accordance with a Mississippi PSC order. Depreciation and amortization expenses increased $13.5 million in 2007 compared to 2006 due to a regulatory liability recorded in 2003 in connection with the Mississippi PSC’s accounting order on Plant Daniel capacity and an increase in amortization of environmental costs related to the approved ECO Plan. See Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters – Performance Evaluation Plan” and “Environmental Compliance Overview Plan” for additional information.
Taxes Other Than Income Taxes
Taxes other than income taxes decreased $1.0 million in 2009 compared to 2008 primarily as a result of a $0.8 million decrease in payroll taxes and a $0.2 million decrease in franchise taxes. Taxes other than income taxes increased $4.8 million in 2008 compared to 2007 primarily as a result of a $2.7 million increase in ad valorem taxes and a $1.3 million increase in municipal franchise taxes. Taxes other than income taxes decreased $0.6 million in 2007 compared to 2006 primarily as a result of a $2.0 million decrease in ad valorem taxes, partially offset by a $1.5 million increase in municipal franchise taxes.
Interest Expense, Net of Amounts Capitalized
Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized increased $5.0 million in 2009 compared to 2008 primarily due to a $5.2 million increase in interest expense associated with the issuance of new long-term debt in November 2008 and March 2009, partially offset by the maturity of long-term debt and lower interest rates in 2009. Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized decreased $0.2 million in 2008 compared to 2007 primarily due to a $2.7 million decrease in borrowing and lower interest rates on short-term indebtedness and a $0.7 million decrease related to the redemption of outstanding trust preferred securities in 2007, partially offset by a $3.0 million increase in interest expense associated with the issuance of new long-term debt in November 2008 and November 2007. Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized decreased $0.5 million in 2007 compared to 2006 due to a $1.3 million decrease in long-term debt primarily related to the redemption of outstanding trust preferred securities, partially offset by the issuance of new long-term debt in November 2007 and a $0.7 million increase in short-term debt borrowing net of amounts related to Hurricane Katrina.
Other Income (Expense), Net
Other income (expense), net decreased $1.7 million in 2009 compared to 2008 primarily due to a $3.0 million decrease in customer projects and amounts collected from customers for construction of substation projects which had a tax effect of $2.6 million, partially offset by higher charitable contributions of $3.9 million in 2008. Other income (expense), net decreased $1.3 million in 2008 compared to 2007 primarily due to higher charitable contributions of $3.1 million, partially offset by a $0.4 million increase in revenues from contracting work performed for customers, a $0.6 million decrease in other deductions, and a $0.6 million increase in allowance for equity funds used during construction. Other income (expense), net increased $12.7 million in 2007 compared to 2006 primarily due to higher charitable contributions of $6.9 million in 2006 as compared to 2007, a gain on a contract termination approved by the FERC in 2007 of $3.7 million, and an increase in customer projects of $2.5 million.
Income Taxes
Income taxes increased $1.9 million, or 3.9%, in 2009 primarily due to increased pre-tax income, the 2008 amortization of a regulatory liability pursuant to a December 2007 regulatory accounting order from the Mississippi PSC which occurred in 2008, and actualization of permanent differences from previous year tax returns, partially offset by an increase in the federal production activities deduction and an increase in a State of Mississippi manufacturing investment tax credit. Income taxes decreased $3.4 million, or 6.7%, in 2008 primarily due to decreased pre-tax income, the amortization of a regulatory liability pursuant to a December 2007 regulatory accounting order from the Mississippi PSC, and a State of Mississippi manufacturing investment tax credit, partially offset by a decrease in the federal production activities deduction. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters” for additional information. Income taxes increased $3.7 million, or 7.8%, in 2007 primarily due to increased pre-tax income and lower federal and state tax credits. See Note 5 to the financial statements under “Effective Tax Rate” for additional information.

II-319


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Effects of Inflation
The Company is subject to rate regulation that is generally based on the recovery of historical and projected costs. The effects of inflation can create an economic loss since the recovery of costs could be in dollars that have less purchasing power. Any adverse effect of inflation on the Company’s results of operations has not been substantial.
FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL
General
The Company operates as a vertically integrated utility providing electricity to retail customers within its traditional service area located in southeast Mississippi and to wholesale customers in the southeast United States. Prices for electricity provided by the Company to retail customers are set by the Mississippi PSC under cost-based regulatory principles. Retail rates and earnings are reviewed and may be adjusted periodically within certain limitations. Prices for wholesale electricity sales, interconnecting transmission lines, and the exchange of electric power are regulated by the FERC. See ACCOUNTING POLICIES — “Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates — Electric Utility Regulation” herein and Note 3 to the financial statements under “FERC Matters” and “Retail Regulatory Matters” for additional information about regulatory matters.
The results of operations for the past three years are not necessarily indicative of future earnings potential. The level of the Company’s future earnings depends on numerous factors that affect the opportunities, challenges, and risks of the Company’s primary business of selling electricity. These factors include the Company’s ability to maintain a constructive regulatory environment that continues to allow for the recovery of prudently incurred costs during a time of increasing costs. Future earnings in the near term will depend, in part, upon maintaining energy sales, which is subject to a number of factors. These factors include weather, competition, new energy contracts with neighboring utilities, energy conservation practiced by customers, the price of electricity, the price elasticity of demand, and the rate of economic growth or decline in the Company’s service area. Recessionary conditions have negatively impacted sales. The timing and extent of the economic recovery will impact future earnings.
Environmental Matters
Compliance costs related to the Clean Air Act and other environmental statutes and regulations could affect earnings if such costs cannot continue to be fully recovered in rates on a timely basis. Environmental compliance spending over the next several years may exceed amounts estimated. Some of the factors driving the potential for such an increase are higher commodity costs, market demand for labor, and scope additions and clarifications. The timing, specific requirements, and estimated costs could also change as environmental statutes and regulations are adopted or modified. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Environmental Matters” for additional information.
New Source Review Actions
In November 1999, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) brought a civil action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, including Alabama Power and Georgia Power, alleging that these subsidiaries had violated the New Source Review (NSR) provisions of the Clean Air Act and related state laws at certain coal-fired generating facilities. These actions were filed concurrently with the issuance of notices of violations to the Company with respect to the Company’s Plant Watson. After Alabama Power was dismissed from the original action, the EPA filed a separate action in January 2001 against Alabama Power in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. In these lawsuits, the EPA alleges that NSR violations occurred at eight coal-fired generating facilities operated by Alabama Power and Georgia Power, including one facility co-owned by the Company. The civil actions request penalties and injunctive relief, including an order requiring installation of the best available control technology at the affected units. In early 2000, the EPA filed a motion to amend its complaint to add the Company as a defendant based on the allegations in the notices of violation. However, in March 2001, the court denied the motion based on lack of jurisdiction, and the EPA has not re-filed. The original action, now solely against Georgia Power, has been administratively closed since the spring of 2001, and the case has not been reopened.
In June 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama entered a consent decree between Alabama Power and the EPA, resolving a portion of the Alabama Power lawsuit relating to the alleged NSR violations at Plant Miller. In July 2008, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama granted partial summary judgment in favor of Alabama Power with respect to its other affected units regarding the proper legal test for determining whether projects are routine maintenance, repair, and replacement and therefore are excluded from NSR permitting. The decision did not resolve the case, which remains ongoing.

II-320


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The Company believes that it complied with applicable laws and the EPA regulations and interpretations in effect at the time the work in question took place. The Clean Air Act authorizes maximum civil penalties of $25,000 to $37,500 per day, per violation at each generating unit, depending on the date of the alleged violation. An adverse outcome in this mattereither of these cases could require substantial capital expenditures or affect the timing of currently budgeted capital expenditures that cannot be determined at this time and could possibly require payment of substantial penalties. Such expenditures could affect future results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.

II-284


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Carbon Dioxide Litigation
New York Case
In July 2004, three environmental groups and attorneys general from eight states, each outside of Southern Company’s service territory, and the corporation counsel for New York City filed complaints in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against Southern Company and four other electric power companies. The complaints allege that the companies’ emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, contribute to global warming, which the plaintiffs assert is a public nuisance. Under common law public and private nuisance theories, the plaintiffs seek a judicial order (1) holding each defendant jointly and severally liable for creating, contributing to, and/or maintaining global warming and (2) requiring each of the defendants to cap its emissions of carbon dioxide and then reduce those emissions by a specified percentage each year for at least a decade. The plaintiffs have not, however, requested that damages be awarded in connection with their claims. Southern Company believes these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. In September 2005, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted Southern Company’s and the other defendants’ motions to dismiss these cases. The plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in October 2005 but no decision has been issued. Theand, on September 21, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the district court’s ruling, vacating the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claim, and remanding the case to the district court. On November 5, 2009, the defendants, including Southern Company, sought rehearing en banc, and the court’s ruling is subject to potential appeal. Therefore, the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Kivalina Case
OnIn February 26, 2008, the Native Village of Kivalina and the City of Kivalina filed a suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against several electric utilities (including Southern Company), several oil companies, and a coal company. The plaintiffs are the governing bodies of an Inupiat village in Alaska. The plaintiffs contend that the village is being destroyed by erosion allegedly caused by global warming that the plaintiffs attribute to emissions of greenhouse gases by the defendants. The plaintiffs assert claims for public and private nuisance and contend that some of the defendants have acted in concert and are therefore jointly and severally liable for the plaintiffs’ damages. The suit seeks damages for lost property values and for the cost of relocating the village, which is alleged to be $95 million to $400 million. On June 30, 2008, all defendants filed motions to dismiss this case. Southern Company believes that these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. On September 30, 2009, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss the case based on lack of jurisdiction and ruled the claims were barred by the political question doctrine and by the plaintiffs’ failure to establish the standard for determining that the defendants’ conduct caused the injury alleged. On November 5, 2009, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit challenging the district court’s order dismissing the case. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Environmental RemediationOther Litigation
The Company must comply with other environmental lawsCommon law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and regulations that cover the handling and disposal of waste and releases of hazardous substances. Under these various laws and regulations, the Company may also incur substantial costs to clean up properties. The Company received authority from the Florida PSC to recover approved environmental compliance costs through the environmental cost recovery clause. The Florida PSC reviews costs and adjusts rates up or down annually.
The Company’s environmental remediation liability includes estimated costs of environmental remediation projects of approximately $66.8 million as of December 31, 2008. These estimated costs relate to site closure criteria by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) for potential impacts to soil and groundwater from herbicide applications at the Company’s substations. The schedule for completion of the remediation projects will be subject to FDEP approval. The projects have been approved by the Florida PSC for recovery through the Company’s environmental cost recovery clause; therefore, there is no impact to net income as a result of these liabilities.
The final outcome of these matters cannot now be determined. However, based on the currently known conditions at these sites and the nature and extent of activities relating to these sites, the Company does not believe that additional liabilities, if any, at these sites would be material to the Company’s financial statements.
FERC Matters
Market-Based Rate Authority
The Company has authorization from the FERC to sell power to non-affiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices. Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based contract with an affiliate.

II-285


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
In December 2004, the FERC initiated a proceeding to assess Southern Company’s generation dominance within its retail service territory. The ability to charge market-based rates in other markets is not an issue in the proceeding. Any new market-based rate sales by the Company in Southern Company’s retail service territory entered into during a 15-month refund period that ended in May 2006 could be subject to refund to a cost-based rate level.
In November 2007, the presiding administrative law judge issued an initial decision regarding the methodology to be used in the generation dominance tests. The proceedings are ongoing. The ultimate outcome of this generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined, but an adverse decision by the FERC in a final order could require the Company to charge cost-based rates for certain wholesale sales in the Southern Company retail service territory, which may be lower than negotiated market-based rates, and could also result in total refunds of up to $0.8 million, plus interest. The Company believes that there is no meritorious basis for an adverse decision in this proceeding and is vigorously defending itself in this matter.
In June 2007, the FERC issued its final rule in Order No. 697 regarding market-based rate authority. The FERC generally retained its current market-based rate standards. Responding to a number of requests for rehearing, the FERC issued Order No. 697-A on April 21, 2008 and Order No. 697-B on December 12, 2008. These orders largely affirmed the FERC’s prior revision and codification of the regulations governing market-based rates for public utilities. In accordance with the orders, Southern Company submitted to the FERC an updated market power analysis on September 2, 2008 related to its continued market-based rate authority. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
On October 17, 2008, Southern Company filed with the FERC a revised market-based rate (MBR) tariff and a new cost-based rate (CBR) tariff.   The revised MBR tariff provides for a “must offer” energy auction whereby Southern Company, offers all of its available energy for sale in a day-ahead auction and an hour-ahead auction with reserve prices not to exceed the CBR tariff price, after considering Southern Company’s native load requirements, reliability obligations, and sales commitments to third parties. All sales under the energy auction would be at market clearing prices established under the auction rules. The new CBR tariff provides for a cost-based price for wholesale sales of less than a year. On December 18, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the MBR tariff subject to certain revisions to the auction proposal. On January 21, 2009, Southern Company made a compliance filing that accepted all the conditions of the MBR tariff order. When this order becomes final, Southern Company will have 30 days to implement the wholesale auction. On December 31, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the CBR tariff subject to providing additional information concerning one aspect of the tariff. On January 30, 2009, Southern Company filed a response addressing the FERC inquiry to the CBR tariff order. Implementation of the energy auction in accordance with the MBR tariff order is expected to adequately mitigate going forward any presumption of market power that Southern Company may have in the Southern Company retail service territory. The timing of when FERC may issue the final orders on the MBR and CBR tariffs and the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Intercompany Interchange Contract
The Company’s generation fleet is operated under the Intercompany Interchange Contract (IIC), as approved by the FERC. In May 2005, the FERC initiated a new proceeding to examine (1) the provisions of the IIC among the traditional operating companies (including the Company), Southern Power, and SCS, as agent, under the terms of which the power pool of Southern Company is operated, (2) whether any parties to the IIC have violated the FERC’s standards of conduct applicable to utility companies that are transmission providers, and (3) whether Southern Company’s code of conduct defining Southern Power as a “system company” rather than a “marketing affiliate” is just and reasonable. In connection with the formation of Southern Power, the FERC authorized Southern Power’s inclusion in the IIC in 2000. The FERC also previously approved Southern Company’s code of conduct.
In October 2006, the FERC issued an order accepting a settlement resolving the proceeding subject to Southern Company’s agreement to accept certain modifications to the settlement’s terms and Southern Company notified the FERC that it accepted the modifications. The modifications largely involve functional separation and information restrictions related to marketing activities conducted on behalf of Southern Power. In November 2006, Southern Company filed with the FERC a compliance plan in connection with the order. In April 2007, the FERC approved, with certain modifications, the plan submitted by Southern Company. Implementation of the plan did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements. In November 2007 Southern Company notified the FERC that the plan had been implemented. On December 12, 2008 the FERC division of audits issued for public comment its final audit report pertaining to compliance implementation and related matters. No comments challenging the audits report’s findings were submitted. A decision is now pending from the FERC.

II-286


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Retail Regulatory Matters
Fuel Cost Recovery
The Company petitions for fuel cost recovery rates to be approved by the Florida PSC on an annual basis. The Company continuously monitors the under recovered fuel cost balance in light of the inherent variability in fuel costs. If the projected fuel cost over or under recovery exceeds 10% of the projected fuel revenue applicable for the period, the Company is required to notify the Florida PSC and indicate if an adjustment to the fuel cost recovery is being requested.
On July 29, 2008, the Florida PSC approved a request by the Company to increase the fuel cost recovery factor effective with billings beginning September 2008. The remaining portion of the projected under recovered balance is expected to be recovered in 2009. On September 2, 2008, the Company filed its 2009 projected fuel cost recovery filing with the Florida PSC which includes the fuel factors proposed for January 2009 through December 2009. On October 13, 2008, the Company notified the Florida PSC that the updated projected fuel cost under recovery balance at year-end exceeds the 10% threshold, but no adjustment to the fuel factors were requested.
On November 6, 2008, the Florida PSC approved an increase of approximately 12.9% in the fuel factor for retail customers, effective with billings beginning January 2009. The fuel factors are intended to allow the Company to recover its projected 2009 fuel and purchased power costs as well as the 2008 under recovered amounts in 2009. Fuel cost recovery revenues, as recorded on the financial statements, are adjusted for differences in actual recoverable costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Accordingly, changing the billing factor has no significant effect on the Company’s revenues or net income, but does impact annual cash flow. As of December 31, 2008, the Company had an under recovered fuel balance of approximately $97 million, which is included in current assets in the balance sheets.
Environmental Cost Recovery
The Florida Legislature adopted legislation for an environmental cost recovery clause, which allows an electric utility to petition the Florida PSC for recovery of prudent environmental compliance costs that are not being recovered through base rates or any other recovery mechanism. Such environmental costs include operation and maintenance expense, emission allowance expense, depreciation, and a return on invested capital. This legislation also allows recovery of costs incurred as a result of an agreement between the Company and the FDEP for the purpose of ensuring compliance with ozone ambient air quality standards adopted by the EPA. In August 2007, the Florida PSC voted to approve a stipulation among the Company, the Office of Public Counsel, and the Florida Industrial Power Users Group regarding the Company’s plan for complying with certain federal and state regulations addressing air quality. The Company’s environmental compliance plan as filed in March 2007 contemplates implementation of specific projects identified in the plan from 2007 through 2018. The stipulation covers all elements of the current plan that are scheduled to be implemented in the 2007 through 2011 timeframe. On September 18, 2008, the Company filed an update to the plan which was approved by the Florida PSC on November 4, 2008. The Florida PSC acknowledged that the costs associated with the Company’s Clean Air Interstate Rule/Clean Air Mercury Rule/Clean Air Visibility Rule compliance plan are eligible for recovery through the environmental cost recovery clause. During 2008, 2007, and 2006, the Company recorded environmental cost recovery clause revenues of $50.0 million, $43.6 million, and $40.9 million, respectively. Annually, the Company seeks recovery of projected costs including any true-up amounts from prior periods. At December 31, 2008, the over recovered balance was approximately $71,000.
Storm Damage Cost Recovery
Under authority granted by the Florida PSC, the Company maintains a reserve for property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas emissions have become more frequent, and courts have recently determined that private parties and states have standing to cover the cost of uninsured damages from major storms to its transmission and distribution facilities, generation facilities, and other property.
In July 2006, the Florida PSC issued an order (2006 Order) approving a stipulation and settlement between the Company and several consumer groups that resolved all matters relating to the Company’s request for recovery of incurred costs for storm-recovery activities and the replenishment of the Company’s property damage reserve. The 2006 Order provided for an extension of the storm-recovery surcharge then being collected by the Company for an additional 27 months, expiring in June 2009.
Funds collected by the Company related to the storm-recovery costs associated with previous hurricanes had been fully recovered by August 2008. Funds collected by the Company through its storm-recovery surcharge are now being credited to the property damage reserve and will continue through June 2009 when the approved surcharge ends.

II-287


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
According to the 2006 Order, in the case of future storms, if the Company incurs cumulative costs for storm-recovery activities in excess of $10 million during any calendar year, the Company will be permitted to file a streamlined formal request for an interim surcharge. Any interim surcharge would provide for the recovery, subject to refund, of up to 80% of the claimed costs for storm-recovery activities. The Company would then petition the Florida PSC for full recovery through a final or non-interim surcharge or other cost recovery mechanism.
See Note 1 under “Property Damage Reserve” for additional information.
4.  JOINT OWNERSHIP AGREEMENTS
The Company and Mississippi Power jointly own Plant Daniel Units 1 and 2, which together represent capacity of 1,000 megawatts. Plant Daniel is a generating plant located in Jackson County, Mississippi. In accordance with the operating agreement, Mississippi Power acts as the Company’s agent with respect to the construction, operation, and maintenance of these units.
The Company and Georgia Power jointly own the 818 megawatts capacity Plant Scherer Unit 3. Plant Scherer is a generating plant located near Forsyth, Georgia. In accordance with the operating agreement, Georgia Power acts as the Company’s agent with respect to the construction, operation, and maintenance of the unit.
The Company’s pro rata share of expenses related to both plants is included in the corresponding operating expense accounts in the statements of income and the Company is responsible for providing its own financing.
At December 31, 2008, the Company’s percentage ownership and its investment in these jointly owned facilities were as follows:
         
  Plant Scherer Plant Daniel
  Unit 3 (coal) Units 1 & 2 (coal)
  (in thousands)
Plant in service $191,688(a) $261,078 
Accumulated depreciation  97,937   146,690 
Construction work in progress  75,760   253 
Ownership  25%  50%
 
(a)Includes net plant acquisition adjustment of $3.3 million.
5.  INCOME TAXES
Southern Company files a consolidated federal income tax return and combined State of Mississippi and State of Georgia income tax returns. Under a joint consolidated income tax allocation agreement, each subsidiary’s current and deferred tax expense is computed on a stand-alone basis and no subsidiary is allocated more expense than would be paid if it filed a separate income tax return. In accordance with Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regulations, each company is jointly and severally liable for the tax liability.
Current and Deferred Income Taxes
Details of income tax provisions are as follows:
             
  2008 2007 2006
  (in thousands)
Federal -            
Current $26,592  $51,321  $40,472 
Deferred  21,481   (9,431)  (470)
 
   48,073   41,890   40,002 
 
State -            
Current  3,563   6,581   3,651 
Deferred  2,467   (1,388)  1,640 
 
   6,030   5,193   5,291 
 
Total $54,103  $47,083  $45,293 
 

II-288


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The tax effects of temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and their respective tax bases, which give rise to deferred tax assets and liabilities, are as follows:
         
  2008 2007
  (in thousands)
Deferred tax liabilities-        
Accelerated depreciation $284,653  $260,720 
Fuel recovery clause  39,176   22,934 
Pension and other employee benefits  15,356   38,109 
Property reserve     6,624 
Regulatory assets associated with employee benefit obligations  34,787   9,206 
Regulatory assets associated with asset retirement obligations  4,877   4,837 
Other  3,747   3,316 
 
Total  382,596   345,746 
 
Deferred tax assets-        
Federal effect of state deferred taxes $14,039  $13,168 
Post retirement benefits  17,428   16,371 
Pension and other employee benefits  38,156   11,880 
Property reserve  4,872    
Other comprehensive loss  3,097   2,386 
Regulatory liabilities associated with employee benefit obligations     23,192 
Asset retirement obligations  4,877   4,837 
Other  7,003   12,126 
 
Total  89,472   83,960 
 
Net deferred tax liabilities  293,124   261,786 
Less current portion, net  (38,770)  (21,685)
 
Accumulated deferred income taxes in the balance sheets $254,354  $240,101 
 
At December 31, 2008, the tax-related regulatory assets to be recovered from customers were $24.2 million. These assets are attributable to tax benefits flowed through to customers in prior years and to taxes applicable to capitalized allowance for funds used during construction. At December 31, 2008, the tax-related regulatory liabilities to be credited to customers were $13.0 million. These liabilities are attributable to deferred taxes previously recognized at rates higher than the current enacted tax law and to unamortized investment tax credits.
In accordance with regulatory requirements, deferred investment tax credits are amortized over the lives of the related property withbring such amortization normally applied as a credit to reduce depreciation in the statements of income. Credits amortized in this manner amounted to $1.7 million in 2008, $1.7 million in 2007, and $1.8 million in 2006. At December 31, 2008, all investment tax credits available to reduce federal income taxes payable had been utilized.
Effective Tax Rate
A reconciliation of the federal statutory income tax rate to the effective income tax rate is as follows:
             
  2008 2007 2006
 
Federal statutory rate  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%
State income tax, net of federal deduction  2.5   2.5   2.8 
Non-deductible book depreciation  0.0   0.4   0.5 
Difference in prior years’ deferred and current tax rate  (0.5)  (0.6)  (0.8)
Production activities deduction  0.1   (1.4)  (0.3)
Allowance for funds used during construction  (2.2)  (0.6)  0.0 
Other, net  (0.8)  (0.4)  (0.8)
 
Effective income tax rate  34.1%  34.9%  36.4%
 

II-289


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The decrease in the 2008 effective tax rate is primarily the result of an increase in nontaxable allowance for equity funds used during construction.
The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 created a tax deduction for a portion of income attributable to U.S. production activities as defined in Internal Revenue Code Section 199 (production activities deduction). The deduction is equal to a stated percentage of qualified production activities net income. The percentage is phased in over the years 2005 through 2010 with a 3% rate applicable to the years 2005 and 2006, a 6% rate applicable for years 2007 through 2009, and a 9% rate thereafter. The increase from 3% in 2006 to 6% in 2007 was one of several factors that increased the Company’s 2007 deduction by $4 million over the 2006 deduction. The resulting additional tax benefit was over $1 million. The IRS has not clearly defined a methodology for calculating this deduction. However, Southern Company has agreed with the IRS on a calculation methodology and signed a closing agreement on December 11, 2008. Therefore, the Company reversed the unrecognized tax benefit and adjusted the deduction for all previous years to conform to the agreement which resulted in a decrease in the 2008 deduction when compared to the 2007 deduction. The net impact of the reversal of unrecognized tax benefits combined with the true-up to the new methodology was immaterial.
Unrecognized Tax Benefits
FIN 48 requires companies to determine whether it is “more likely than not” that a tax position will be sustained upon examination by the appropriate taxing authorities before any part of the benefit can be recorded in the financial statements. It also provides guidance on the recognition, measurement, and classification of income tax uncertainties, along with any related interest and penalties.claims. For 2008, the total amount of unrecognized tax benefits decreased by $0.6 million, resulting in a balance of $0.3 million as of December 31, 2008.
Changes during the year in unrecognized tax benefits were as follows:
         
  2008 2007
  (thousands)
Unrecognized tax benefits at beginning of year $887  $211 
Tax positions from current periods  93   469 
Tax positions from prior periods  11   207 
Reductions due to settlements  (697)   
Reductions due to expired statute of limitations      
 
Balance at end of year $294  $887 
 
The reduction due to settlements relates to the agreement with the IRS regarding the production activities deduction methodology. See “Effective Tax Rate” above for additional information.
Impact on the Company’s effective tax rate, if recognized, is as follows:
             
  2008 2007 Change
  (thousands)
Tax positions impacting the effective tax rate $294  $887  $593 
Tax positions not impacting the effective tax rate         
 
Balance of unrecognized tax benefits $294  $887  $593 
 
Accrued interest for unrecognized tax benefits:
         
  2008 2007
  (thousands)
Interest accrued at beginning of year $58  $5 
Interest reclassified due to settlements  (54)   
Interest accrued during the year  13   53 
 
Balance at end of year $17  $58 
 
The Company classifies interest on tax uncertainties as interest expense. The Company did not accrue any penalties on uncertain tax positions.

II-290


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The IRS has audited and closed all tax returns prior to 2004. The audits for the state returns have either been concluded, or the statute of limitations has expired, for years prior to 2002.
It is reasonably possible that the amount of the unrecognized benefit with respect to the majority of the Company’s unrecognized tax positions will significantly increase or decrease within the next 12 months. The possible conclusion or settlement of federal or state audits could impact the balances significantly. At this time, an estimate of the range of reasonably possible outcomes cannot be determined.
6.  FINANCING
Long-Term Debt Payable to Affiliated Trusts
The Company has formed certain wholly owned trust subsidiaries for the purpose of issuing preferred securities. The proceeds of the related equity investments and preferred security sales were loaned back to the Company through the issuance of junior subordinated notes which constitute substantially all of the assets of these trusts and are reflected in the balance sheets as Long-Term Debt. The Company considers that the mechanisms and obligations relating to the preferred securities issued for its benefit, taken together, constitute a full and unconditional guarantee by it of the trusts’ payment obligations with respect to these securities. During 2007, the Company redeemed its last remaining series, which totaled $41.2 million. See Note 1 under “Variable Interest Entities” for additional information on the accounting treatment for these trusts and the related securities.
Bank Term Loans
In 2008, the Company borrowed $110 million under a three-year term loan agreement and $50 million under a short-term loan agreement. The proceeds of these issuances were used for general corporate purposes, including the Company’s continuous construction program.
Senior Notes
At December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company had a total of $588.7 million and $590.0 million of senior notes outstanding, respectively. These senior notes are subordinate to all secured debt of the Company which amounts to approximately $41 million at December 31, 2008.
Pollution Control Revenue Bonds
Pollution control obligations represent loans to the Company from public authorities of funds derived from sales by such authorities of revenue bonds issued to finance pollution control facilities. The Company has $157.6 million of outstanding pollution control revenue bonds and is required to make payments sufficient for the authorities to meet principal and interest requirements of such bonds.
Outstanding Classes of Capital Stock
The Company currently has preferred stock, Class A preferred stock, preference stock, and common stock authorized. The Company’s preferred stock and Class A preferred stock, without preference between classes, rank senior to the Company’s preference stock and common stock with respect to payment of dividends and voluntary or involuntary dissolution. No shares of preferred stock or Class A preferred stock were outstanding at December 31, 2008. The Company’s preference stock ranks senior to the common stock with respect to the payment of dividends and voluntary or involuntary dissolution. Certain series of the preference stock are subject to redemption at the option of the Company on or after a specified date (typically 5 or 10 years after the date of issuance) at a redemption price equal to 100% of the liquidation amount of the preference stock. In addition, one series of the preference stock may be redeemed earlier at a redemption price equal to 100% of the liquidation amount plus a make-whole premium based on the present value of the liquidation amount and future dividends.
In January 2007, the Company issued to Southern Company 800,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, without par value, and realized proceeds of $80 million. The proceeds were used to repay a portion of the Company’s short-term indebtedness and for other general corporate purposes. Subsequent to December 31, 2008, the Company issued to Southern Company 1,350,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, without par value, and realized proceeds of $135 million.

II-291


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Dividend Restrictions
The Company can only pay dividends to Southern Company out of retained earnings or paid-in-capital.
Assets Subject to Lien
In January 2007, the Company’s first mortgage bond indenture was discharged. As a result, there are no longer any first mortgage liens on the Company’s property and the Company no longer has to comply with the covenants and restrictions of the first mortgage bond indenture. The Company has granted a lien on its property at Plant Daniel in connection with the issuance of two series of pollution control bonds with an outstanding principal amount of $41 million.
There are no agreements or other arrangements among the affiliated companies under which the assets of one company have been pledged or otherwise made available to satisfy obligations of Southern Company or any of its subsidiaries.
Bank Credit Arrangements
At December 31, 2008, the Company had $120 million of lines of credit with banks, all of which remained unused. These bank credit arrangements will expire in 2009 and $90 million contain provisions allowing one-year term loans executable at expiration. Of the $120 million, $116 million provides liquidity support for the Company’s commercial paper program and $4 million provides support for variable rate pollution control bonds. Subsequent to December 31, 2008, the Company obtained an additional $20 million of committed credit. Commitment fees average less than 1/4 of 1% for the Company.
Certain credit arrangements contain covenants that limit the level of indebtedness to capitalization to 65%, as defined in the arrangements. At December 31, 2008, the Company was in compliance with these covenants.
In addition, certain credit arrangements contain cross default provisions to other indebtedness that would trigger an event of default if the Company defaulted on indebtedness over a specified threshold. The cross default provisions are restricted only to indebtedness of the Company. The Company is currently in compliance with all such covenants.
The Company borrows primarily through a commercial paper program that has the liquidity support of committed bank credit arrangements. The Company may also borrow through various other arrangements with banks. At December 31, 2008, the Company had $89.9 million of commercial paper and $50 million of bank notes outstanding. At December 31, 2007, the Company had $40.8 million of commercial paper outstanding. During 2008, the peak amount outstanding for short term debt was $141.2 million and the average amount outstanding was $36.9 million. The average annual interest rate on commercial paper was 2.2%.
Financial Instruments
The Company enters into energy-related derivatives to hedge exposures to electricity, gas, and other fuel price changes. However, due to cost-based rate regulations, the Company has limited exposure to market volatility in commodity fuel prices and prices of electricity. The Company has implemented a fuel-hedging program per the guidelines of the Florida PSC. The Company enters into hedges of forward electricity sales.
At December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company had a net $31.2 million and $0.2 million fair value liability, respectively, of energy-related derivative contracts designated as regulatory hedges in the financial statements.
The gains and losses arising from these regulatory hedges are initially recorded as regulatory liabilities and assets, respectively, and then are included in fuel expense as they are recovered through the fuel cost recovery clause. There was no ineffectiveness recorded in the earnings for any period presented. The Company has energy-related hedges in place up to and including 2011.
The Company also enters into derivatives to hedge exposure to changes in interest rates. Derivatives related to forecasted transactions are accounted for as cash flow hedges and will be terminated at the time the underlying debt is issued. The derivatives employed as hedging instruments are structured to minimize ineffectiveness. As such, no ineffectiveness has been recorded in earnings for any period presented. At December 31, 2008, the Company had no interest rate derivatives outstanding.
The fair value gains or losses for cash flow hedges are recorded in other comprehensive income and are reclassified into earnings at the same time the hedged items affect earnings. In 2008, 2007, and 2006, the Company settled gains/(losses) totaling $(5.2) million,

II-292


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
$3.0 million, and $(5.4) million, respectively, upon termination of certain interest derivatives at the same time it issued debt. The effective portion of these gains/(losses) have been deferred in other comprehensive income and will be amortized to interest expense over the life of the original interest derivative. For the years 2008, 2007, and 2006, approximately $0.9 million, $0.7 million, and $0.4 million, respectively, of pre-tax losses were reclassified from other comprehensive income to interest expense. For 2009, pre-tax losses of approximately $1.1 million are expected to be reclassified from other comprehensive income to interest expense. The Company has deferred realized net losses that are being amortized through 2018.
All derivative financial instruments are recognized as either assets or liabilities and are measured at fair value. See Note 9 for additional information.
7.  COMMITMENTS
Construction Program
The Company is engaged in a continuous construction program, the cost of which is currently estimated to total $478 million in 2009, $337 million in 2010, and $400 million in 2011. The construction programs are subject to periodic review and revision, and actual construction costs may vary from these estimates because of numerous factors. These factors include: changes in business conditions; revised load growth estimates; storm impacts; changes in environmental statutes and regulations; changes in FERC rules and regulations; Florida PSC approvals; the cost and efficiency of construction labor, equipment, and materials; and the cost of capital. In addition, there can be no assurance that costs related to capital expenditures will be fully recovered. At December 31, 2008, significant purchase commitments were outstanding in connection with the ongoing construction program.
Included in the amounts above are $335 million in 2009, $164 million in 2010, and $233 million in 2011 for environmental expenditures. The Company does not have any new generating capacity under construction. Construction of new transmission and distribution facilities and other capital improvements, including those needed to meet environmental standards for the Company’s existing generation, transmission, and distribution facilities, are ongoing.
Long-Term Service Agreements
The Company has a Long-Term Service Agreement (LTSA) with General Electric (GE) for the purpose of securing maintenance support for a combined cycle generating facility. The LTSA provides that GE will perform all planned inspections on the covered equipment, which generally includes the cost of all labor and materials. GE is also obligated to cover the costs of unplanned maintenance on the covered equipment subject to limits and scope specified in the LTSA.
In general, the LTSA is in effect through two major inspection cycles of the unit. Scheduled payments to GE, which are subject to price escalation, are made at various intervals based on actual operating hours of the unit. Total remaining payments to GE under the LTSA for facilities owned are currently estimated at $62.5 million over the remaining life of the LTSA, which is currently estimated to be up to 9 years. However, the LTSA contains various cancellation provisions at the option of the Company.
Payments made under the LTSA prior to the performance of any planned inspections are recorded as prepayments. These amounts are included in Current Assets and Deferred Charges and Other Assets in the balance sheets, for 2008 and 2007, respectively. Inspection costs are capitalized or charged to expense based on the nature of the work performed.
Limestone Commitments
As part of the Company’s program to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions from certain of its coal plants, the Company has begun construction of flue gas desulfurization projects and has entered into various long-term commitments for the procurement of limestone to be used in such equipment. Limestone contracts are structured with tonnage minimums and maximums in order to account for fluctuations in coal burn and sulfur content. The Company has a minimum contractual obligation of 0.8 million tons equating to approximately $63.8 million, through 2019. Estimated expenditures (based on minimum contracted obligated dollars) over the next five years are none in 2009, $5.7 million in 2010, $5.8 million in 2011, $6.0 million in 2012, and $6.1 million in 2013. Limestone costs are expected to be recovered through the environmental cost recovery clause.

II-293


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Fuel and Purchased Power Commitments
To supply a portion of the fuel requirements of the generating plants, the Company has entered into various long-term commitments for the procurement of fossil fuel. In most cases, these contracts contain provisions for price escalations, minimum purchase levels, and other financial commitments. Coal commitments include forward contract purchases for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emission allowances. Natural gas purchase commitments contain fixed volumes with prices based on various indices at the time of delivery; amounts included in the chart below represent estimates based on New York Mercantile Exchange future prices at December 31, 2008. Also, the Company has entered into various long-term commitments for the purchase of capacity, electricity, and transmission.
Total estimated minimum long-term obligations at December 31, 2008 were as follows:
             
  Commitments
  Purchased Power* Natural Gas Coal
  (in thousands)
2009 $23,007  $112,618  $282,370 
2010  26,811   85,713   158,520 
2011  26,861   42,607   23,966 
2012  26,927   20,149    
2013  27,070   20,127    
2014 and thereafter  3,918   151,016    
 
Total $134,594  $432,230  $464,856 
 
*Included above is $81 million in obligations with affiliated companies.
Additional commitments for fuel will be required to supply the Company’s future needs.
SCS may enter into various types of wholesale energy and natural gas contracts acting as an agent for the Company and all of the other Southern Company traditional operating companies and Southern Power. Under these agreements, each of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power may be jointly and severally liable. The creditworthiness of Southern Power is currently inferior to the creditworthiness of the traditional operating companies. Accordingly, Southern Company has entered into keep-well agreements with the Company and each of the other traditional operating companies to ensure the Company will not subsidize or be responsible for any costs, losses, liabilities, or damages resulting from the inclusion of Southern Power as a contracting party under these agreements.
Operating Leases
The Company has operating lease agreements with various terms and expiration dates. Total operating lease expenses were $5.0 million, $4.7 million, and $4.9 million, for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Included in these lease expenses are railcar lease costs which are charged to fuel inventory and are allocated to fuel expense as the fuel is used. These expenses are then recovered through the Company’s fuel cost recovery clause. The Company’s share of the lease costs charged to fuel inventories was $4.0 million in 2008, $4.4 million in 2007, and $4.6 million in 2006. The Company includes any step rents, escalations, and lease concessions in its computation of minimum lease payments, which are recognized on a straight-line basis over the minimum lease term.
At December 31, 2008, estimated minimum rental commitments for noncancelable operating leases were as follows:
             
  Minimum Lease Payments
  Rail Cars Other Total
  (in thousands)
2009 $3,547  $2,002  $5,549 
2010  3,545   1,877   5,422 
2011  1,822   1,820   3,642 
2012  1,229   219   1,448 
2013  904      904 
2014 and thereafter  2,223      2,223 
 
Total $13,270  $5,918  $19,188 
 

II-294


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The Company and Mississippi Power jointly entered into operating lease agreements for aluminum railcars for the transportation of coal to Plant Daniel. The Company has the option to purchase the railcars at the greater of lease termination value or fair market value or to renew the leases at the end of each lease term. The Company and Mississippi Power also have separate lease agreements for other railcars that do not include purchase options.
In addition to railcar leases, the Company has other operating leases for fuel handling equipment at Plant Daniel. The Company’s share of these leases was charged to fuel handling expense in the amount of $0.3 million in 2008. The Company’s annual lease payments for 2009 to 2010 will average approximately $0.1 million.
8.  STOCK OPTION PLAN
Southern Company provides non-qualified stock options to a large segment of the Company’s employees ranging from line management to executives. As of December 31, 2008, there were 292 current and former employees of the Company participating in the stock option plan, and there were 33.2 million shares of common stock remaining available for awards under this plan. The prices of options granted to date have been at the fair market value of the shares on the dates of grant. Options granted to date become exercisable pro rata over a maximum period of three years from the date of grant. The Company generally recognizes stock option expense on a straight-line basis over the vesting period which equates to the requisite service period; however, for employees who are eligible for retirement the total cost is expensed at the grant date. Options outstanding will expire no later than 10 years after the date of grant, unless terminated earlier by the Southern Company Board of Directors in accordance with the stock option plan. For certain stock option awards a change in control will provide accelerated vesting.
The estimated fair values of stock options granted in 2008, 2007, and 2006 were derived using the Black-Scholes stock option pricing model. Expected volatility was based on historical volatility of Southern Company’s stock over a period equal to the expected term. The Company used historical exercise data to estimate the expected term that represents the period of time that options granted to employees are expected to be outstanding. The risk-free rate was based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant that covers the expected term of the stock options. The following table shows the assumptions used in the pricing model and the weighted average grant-date fair value of stock options granted:
             
Year Ended December 31 2008 2007 2006
 
Expected volatility  13.1%  14.8%  16.9%
Expected term(in years)
  5.0   5.0   5.0 
Interest rate  2.8%  4.6%  4.6%
Dividend yield  4.5%  4.3%  4.4%
Weighted average grant-date fair value $2.37  $4.12  $4.15 
The Company’s activity in the stock option plan for 2008 is summarized below:
         
  Shares Subject Weighted Average
  to Option Exercise Price
 
Outstanding at December 31, 2007  1,225,355  $31.01 
Granted  239,507   35.79 
Exercised  (184,865)  28.56 
Cancelled  (232)  35.78 
 
Outstanding at December 31, 2008
  1,279,765   32.25 
 
Exercisable at December 31, 2008
  818,636  $30.31 
 
The number of stock options vested, and expected to vest in the future, as of December 31, 2008 was not significantly different from the number of stock options outstanding at December 31, 2008 as stated above. As of December 31, 2008, the weighted average remaining contractual term for the options outstanding and options exercisable was 6.3 years and 5.1 years, respectively, and the aggregate intrinsic value for the options outstanding and options exercisable was $6.1 million and $5.5 million, respectively.
As of December 31, 2008, there was $0.4 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to stock option awards not yet vested. That cost is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of approximately 8 months.

II-295


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
For the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007, and 2006, total compensation cost for stock option awards recognized in income was $0.8 million, $1.1 million, and $1.0 million, respectively, with the related tax benefit also recognized in income of $0.3 million, $0.4 million, and $0.4 million, respectively.
The compensation cost and tax benefits related to the grant and exercise of Southern Company stock options to the Company’s employees are recognized in the Company’s financial statements with a corresponding credit to equity, representing a capital contribution from Southern Company.
The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007, and 2006 was $1.3 million, $3.0 million, and $1.6 million, respectively. The actual tax benefit realized by the Company for the tax deductions from stock option exercises for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007, and 2006 totaled $0.5 million, $1.1 million, and $0.6 million, respectively.
9. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
On January 1, 2008, the Company adopted FASB Statement No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (SFAS No. 157) which defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value, and requires additional disclosures about fair value measurements. The criterion that is set forth in SFAS No. 157 is applicable to fair value measurement where it is permitted or required under other accounting pronouncements.
SFAS No. 157 defines fair value as the exit price, which is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The fair value measurement is based on inputs of observable and unobservable market data that a market participant would use in pricing the asset or liability. The use of observable inputs is maximized where available and the use of unobservable inputs is minimized for fair value measurement. As a means to illustrate the inputs used, SFAS No. 157 establishes a three-tier fair value hierarchy that prioritizes inputs to valuation techniques used for fair value measurement.
Level 1 consists of observable market data in an active market for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2 consists of observable market data, other than that included in Level 1, that is either directly or indirectly observable.
Level 3 consists of unobservable market data. The input may reflect the assumptions of the Company of what a market participant would use in pricing an asset or liability. If there is little available market data, then the Company’s own assumptions are the best available information.
In the case of multiple inputs being used in a fair value measurement, the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement represents the level in the fair value hierarchy in which the fair value measurement is reported.
The adoption of SFAS No. 157 has not resulted in any significant changes to the methodologies used for fair value measurement. Primarily all the changes in the fair value of assets and liabilities are recorded in other comprehensive income or regulatory assets and liabilities, and thus the impact on earnings is limited to derivatives that do not qualify for hedge accounting.
The fair value measurements performed on a recurring basis and the level of the fair value hierarchy in which they fall at December 31, 2008 are as follows:
                 
At December 31, 2008: Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total
  (in millions)
Assets:                
Energy-related derivatives total fair value $  $1.0  $  $1.0 
 
                 
Liabilities:                
Energy-related derivatives total fair value $  $32.2  $  $32.2 
 
Energy-related derivatives primarily consist of over-the-counter contracts. See Note 6 under “Financial Instruments” for additional information. These financial instruments and investments are valued primarily using the market approach.

II-296


NOTES (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
10. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL INFORMATION (UNAUDITED)
Summarized quarterly financial data for 2008 and 2007 are as follows:
             
          Net Income After
  Operating Operating Dividends on
Quarter Ended Revenues Income Preference Stock
  (in thousands)
March 2008
 $311,535  $40,708  $19,530 
June 2008
  349,867   52,314   26,992 
September 2008
  421,841   69,039   37,343 
December 2008
  303,960   30,628   14,480 
 
March 2007 $296,233  $40,775  $18,863 
June 2007  298,394   45,017   21,275 
September 2007  376,556   64,999   34,163 
December 2007  288,625   25,125   9,817 
 
The Company’s business is influenced by seasonal weather conditions.

II-297


SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA 2004-2008
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
                     
  2008  2007  2006  2005  2004 
 
Operating Revenues (in thousands)
 $1,387,203  $1,259,808  $1,203,914  $1,083,622  $960,131 
Net Income after Dividends on Preferred and Preference Stock (in thousands)
 $98,345  $84,118  $75,989  $75,209  $68,223 
Cash Dividends on Common Stock (in thousands)
 $81,700  $74,100  $70,300  $68,400  $70,000 
Return on Average Common Equity (percent)
  12.66   12.32   12.29   12.59   11.83 
Total Assets (in thousands)
 $2,879,025  $2,498,987  $2,340,489  $2,175,797  $2,111,877 
Gross Property Additions (in thousands)
 $390,744  $239,337  $147,086  $142,583  $161,205 
 
Capitalization (in thousands):
                    
Common stock equity $822,092  $731,255  $634,023  $602,344  $592,172 
Preferred and preference stock  97,998   97,998   53,887   53,891   4,098 
Long-term debt  849,265   740,050   696,098   616,554   623,155 
 
Total (excluding amounts due within one year) $1,769,355  $1,569,303  $1,384,008  $1,272,789  $1,219,425 
 
Capitalization Ratios (percent):
                    
Common stock equity  46.5   46.6   45.8   47.3   48.6 
Preferred and preference stock  5.5   6.2   3.9   4.2   0.3 
Long-term debt  48.0   47.2   50.3   48.5   51.1 
 
Total (excluding amounts due within one year)  100.0   100.0   100.0   100.0   100.0 
 
Security Ratings:
                    
First Mortgage Bonds -                    
Moody’s           A1   A1 
Standard and Poor’s           A+   A+ 
Fitch           A+   A+ 
Preferred Stock/ Preference Stock -                    
Moody’s Baa1  Baa1  Baa1  Baa1  Baa1 
Standard and Poor’s BBB+  BBB+  BBB+  BBB+  BBB+ 
Fitch  A-   A-   A-   A-   A- 
Unsecured Long-Term Debt -                    
Moody’s  A2   A2   A2   A2   A2 
Standard and Poor’s  A   A   A   A   A 
Fitch  A   A   A   A   A 
 
Customers (year-end):
                    
Residential  373,595   373,036   364,647   354,466   343,151 
Commercial  53,548   53,838   53,466   53,398   51,865 
Industrial  287   298   295   298   285 
Other  499   491   484   479   473 
 
Total  427,929   427,663   418,892   408,641   395,774 
 
Employees (year-end)
  1,342   1,324   1,321   1,335   1,336 
 

II-298


SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA 2004-2008 (continued)
Gulf Power Company 2008 Annual Report
                     
  2008  2007  2006  2005  2004 
 
Operating Revenues (in thousands):
                    
Residential $581,723  $537,668  $510,995  $465,346  $401,382 
Commercial  369,625   329,651   305,049   273,114   232,928 
Industrial  165,564   135,179   132,339   123,044   99,420 
Other  3,854   3,831   3,655   3,355   3,140 
 
Total retail  1,120,766   1,006,329   952,038   864,859   736,870 
Wholesale — non-affiliates  97,065   83,514   87,142   84,346   73,537 
Wholesale — affiliates  106,989   113,178   118,097   91,352   110,264 
 
Total revenues from sales of electricity  1,324,820   1,203,021   1,157,277   1,040,557   920,671 
Other revenues  62,383   56,787   46,637   43,065   39,460 
 
Total $1,387,203  $1,259,808  $1,203,914  $1,083,622  $960,131 
 
Kilowatt-Hour Sales (in thousands):
                    
Residential  5,348,642   5,477,111   5,425,491   5,319,630   5,215,332 
Commercial  3,960,923   3,970,892   3,843,064   3,735,776   3,695,471 
Industrial  2,210,597   2,048,389   2,136,439   2,160,760   2,113,027 
Other  23,237   24,496   23,886   22,730   22,579 
 
Total retail  11,543,399   11,520,888   11,428,880   11,238,896   11,046,409 
Sales for resale — non-affiliates  1,816,839   2,227,026   2,079,165   2,295,850   2,256,942 
Sales for resale — affiliates  1,871,158   2,884,440   2,937,735   1,976,368   3,124,788 
 
Total  15,231,396   16,632,354   16,445,780   15,511,114   16,428,139 
 
Average Revenue Per Kilowatt-Hour (cents):
                    
Residential  10.88   9.82   9.42   8.75   7.70 
Commercial  9.33   8.30   7.94   7.31   6.30 
Industrial  7.49   6.60   6.19   5.69   4.71 
Total retail  9.71   8.73   8.33   7.70   6.67 
Wholesale  5.53   3.85   4.09   4.11   3.42 
Total sales  8.70   7.23   7.04   6.71   5.60 
Residential Average Annual Kilowatt-Hour Use Per Customer
  14,274   14,755   15,032   15,181   15,096 
Residential Average Annual Revenue Per Customer
 $1,552  $1,448  $1,416  $1,328  $1,162 
Plant Nameplate Capacity Ratings (year-end) (megawatts)
  2,659   2,659   2,659   2,712   2,712 
Maximum Peak-Hour Demand (megawatts):
                    
Winter  2,360   2,215   2,195   2,124   2,061 
Summer  2,533   2,626   2,479   2,433   2,421 
Annual Load Factor (percent)
  56.7   55.0   57.9   57.7   57.1 
Plant Availability Fossil-Steam (percent)
  88.6   93.4   91.3   89.7   92.4 
 
Source of Energy Supply (percent):
                    
Coal  77.3   81.8   82.5   79.7   77.9 
Gas  15.3   13.6   12.4   13.1   14.4 
Purchased power -                    
From non-affiliates  2.6   1.6   1.9   2.8   4.5 
From affiliates  4.8   3.0   3.2   4.4   3.2 
 
Total  100.0   100.0   100.0   100.0   100.0 
 

II-299


MISSISSIPPI POWER COMPANY
FINANCIAL SECTION

II-300


MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The management of Mississippi Power Company (the “Company”) is responsible for establishing and maintaining an adequate system of internal control over financial reporting as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). A control system can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.
Under management’s supervision, an evaluation of the design and effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was conducted based on the framework inInternal Control—Integrated Frameworkissued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this evaluation, management concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2008.
This Annual Report does not include an attestation report of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation by the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit the Company to provide only management’s report in this Annual Report.
/s/ Anthony J. Topazi

Anthony J. Topazi
President and Chief Executive Officer
/s/ Frances Turnage

Frances Turnage
Vice President, Treasurer, and Chief Financial Officer
February 25, 2009

II-301


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Mississippi Power Company
We have audited the accompanying balance sheets and statements of capitalization of Mississippi Power Company (the “Company”) (a wholly owned subsidiary of Southern Company) as of December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the related statements of income, comprehensive income, common stockholder’s equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008.  These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.  The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting.  Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.  Accordingly, we express no such opinion.  An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.  We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such financial statements (pages II-328 to II-362) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Mississippi Power Company at December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. 
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
February 25, 2009

II-302


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
OVERVIEW
Business Activities
Mississippi Power Company (the Company) operates as a vertically integrated utility providing electricity to retail customers within its traditional service area located within the State of Mississippi and to wholesale customers in the Southeast.
Many factors affect the opportunities, challenges, and risks of the Company’s business of selling electricity. These factors include the ability to maintain a constructive regulatory environment, to maintain energy sales in the midst of the current economic downturn, and to effectively manage and secure timely recovery of rising costs. The Company has various regulatory mechanisms that operate to address cost recovery. Since 2005, the Company has completed a number of regulatory proceedings that provide for the timely recovery of costs.
Appropriately balancing required costs and capital expenditures with reasonable retail rates will continue to challenge the Company for the foreseeable future. Hurricane Katrina, the worst natural disaster in the Company’s history, hit the Gulf Coast of Mississippi in August 2005, causing substantial damage to the Company’s service territory. All of the Company’s 195,000 customers were without service immediately after the storm. Through a coordinated effort with Southern Company, as well as non-affiliated companies, the Company restored power to all who could receive it within 12 days. However, due to obstacles in the rebuilding process, the Company has over 7,500 fewer retail customers as of December 31, 2008 as compared to pre-storm levels. In 2006, the Company received from the Mississippi Development Authority (MDA) a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) in the amount of $276.4 million for costs related to Hurricane Katrina, of which $267.6 million was for the retail portion of the Hurricane Katrina restoration costs. In 2007, the Company received $109.3 million of storm restoration bond proceeds under the state bond program of which $25.2 million was for retail storm restoration cost, $60.0 million was to increase the Company’s retail property damage reserve, and $24.1 million was to cover the retail portion of construction of a new storm operations center. In 2008, the Company received an additional $7.3 million of storm restoration bond proceeds related to the retail portion of construction for the storm operations center and anticipates the receipt of approximately $3.2 million in 2009 as final recovery of these retail costs.
The Company’s retail base rates are set under the Performance Evaluation Plan (PEP), a rate plan approved by the Mississippi Public Service Commission (PSC). PEP was designed with the objective to reduce the impact of rate changes on the customer and provide incentives for the Company to keep customer prices low and customer satisfaction and reliability high.
Key Performance Indicators
In striving to maximize shareholder value while providing cost effective energy to customers, the Company continues to focus on several key indicators. These indicators are used to measure the Company’s performance for customers and employees.
In recognition that the Company’s long-term financial success is dependent upon how well it satisfies its customers’ needs, the Company’s retail base rate mechanism, PEP, includes performance indicators that directly tie customer service indicators to the Company’s allowed return. PEP measures the Company’s performance on a 10-point scale as a weighted average of results in three areas: average customer price, as compared to prices of other regional utilities (weighted at 40%); service reliability, measured in outage minutes per customer (40%); and customer satisfaction, measured in a survey of residential customers (20%). See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Performance Evaluation Plan” for more information on PEP.
In addition to the PEP performance indicators, the Company focuses on other performance measures, including broader measures of customer satisfaction, plant availability, system reliability, and net income. The Company’s financial success is directly tied to the satisfaction of its customers. Management uses customer satisfaction surveys to evaluate the Company’s results. Peak season equivalent forced outage rate (Peak Season EFOR) is an indicator of plant availability and efficient generation fleet operations during the months when generation needs are greatest. The rate is calculated by dividing the number of hours of forced outages by total generation hours. The actual EFOR performance for 2008 did not meet the target due to the effects of an unanticipated turbine rotor outage at Plant Daniel Unit 1. Net income after dividends on preferred stock is the primary component of the Company’s contribution to Southern Company’s earnings per share goal. Recognizing the critical role in the Company’s success played by the Company’s employees, employee-related measures are a significant management focus. These measures include safety and inclusion. The 2008 safety performance of the Company was the second best in the history of the Company with an Occupational Safety and Health Administration Incidence Rate of 0.53. This achievement resulted in the Company being recognized as one of the top in safety performance among all utilities in the Southeastern Electric Exchange. Inclusion initiatives resulted in performance at target levels for the year. The Company’s 2008 results compared with its targets for some of these key indicators are reflected in the following chart.

II-303


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
2008
Target
2008
Actual
Key Performance IndicatorPerformancePerformance
Customer Satisfaction
Top quartile in customer
surveys
Top quartile
Peak Season EFOR
3.0% or less6.53%
Net Income
$84.3 million$86.0 million
See RESULTS OF OPERATIONS herein for additional information on the Company’s financial performance. The financial performance achieved in 2008 reflects the continued emphasis that management places on all of these indicators, as well as the commitment shown by employees in achieving or exceeding management’s expectations.
Earnings
The Company’s net income after dividends on preferred stock was $86.0 million in 2008 compared to $84.0 million in 2007. The 2.4% increase in 2008 was primarily the result of an increase in territorial base revenues due to a retail base rate increase effective January 2008 and an increase in wholesale capacity revenues, partially offset by an increase in depreciation and amortization primarily due to the amortization of regulatory items, an increase in non-fuel related expenses, and an increase in charitable contributions. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters” for additional information.
Net income after dividends on preferred stock was $84.0 million in 2007 compared to $82.0 million in 2006. The 2.4% increase in 2007 was primarily the result of an increase in territorial base revenues due to a retail base rate increase effective April 1, 2006, territorial sales growth, and an increase in total other income and expense as a result of charitable contributions in 2006. These factors were partially offset by an increase in non-fuel related expenses and an increase in depreciation and amortization expenses. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters” for additional information.
Net income after dividends on preferred stock of $82.0 million in 2006 increased when compared to $73.8 million in 2005 primarily as a result of an increase in retail base rates which became effective April 1, 2006, an increase in wholesale base revenues partially offset by an increase in depreciation and amortization expenses, a decrease in total other income and expense as a result of charitable contributions, and higher interest rates on long-term debt.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
A condensed statement of income follows:
                 
      Increase (Decrease)
  Amount from Prior Year
  2008 2008 2007 2006
  (in millions)
Operating revenues $1,256.5  $142.8  $104.5  $39.5 
 
Fuel  586.5   92.2   55.6   80.1 
Purchased power  126.6   30.7   22.6   (70.2)
Other operations and maintenance  260.0   4.8   18.6   (3.0)
Depreciation and amortization  71.0   10.7   13.5   13.3 
Taxes other than income taxes  65.1   4.8   (0.6)  0.8 
 
Total operating expenses  1,109.2   143.2   109.7   21.0 
 
Operating income  147.3   (0.4)  (5.2)  18.5 
Total other income and (expense)  (11.3)  (1.1)  10.9   (8.6)
Income taxes  48.3   (3.4)  3.7   1.7 
 
Net income  87.7   1.9   2.0   8.2 
Dividends on preferred stock  1.7          
 
Net income after dividends on preferred stock $86.0  $1.9  $2.0  $8.2 
 

II-304


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Operating Revenues
Details of the Company’s operating revenues in 2008 and the prior two years were as follows:
             
  Amount
  2008 2007 2006
  (in millions)
Retail — prior year $727.2  $647.2  $618.9 
Estimated change in —            
Rates and pricing  18.8   8.7   23.2 
Sales growth  (1.1)  12.3   (5.2)
Weather  (1.8)  (2.5)  5.0 
Fuel and other cost recovery  42.3   61.5   5.3 
 
Retail — current year  785.4   727.2   647.2 
 
Wholesale revenues —            
Non-affiliates  353.8   323.1   268.8 
Affiliates  100.9   46.2   76.4 
 
Total wholesale revenues  454.7   369.3   345.2 
 
Other operating revenues  16.4   17.2   16.8 
 
Total operating revenues $1,256.5  $1,113.7  $1,009.2 
 
Percent change  12.8%  10.4%  4.1%
 
Total retail revenues for 2008 increased 8.0% when compared to 2007 primarily as a result of a retail base rate increase effective January 2008 and higher fuel revenues. Total retail revenues for 2007 increased 12.4% when compared to 2006 primarily as a result of an increase in territorial sales growth, a retail base rate increase effective April 1, 2006, and the Environmental Compliance Overview (ECO) Plan rate effective May 2007. Higher fuel revenues also contributed to the increase. Total retail revenues for 2006 increased 4.6% when compared to 2005 primarily as a result of a retail base rate increase effective April 1, 2006. Higher fuel revenues also contributed to the increase.
Electric rates for the Company include provisions to adjust billings for fluctuations in fuel costs, including the energy component of purchased power costs. Under these provisions, fuel revenues generally equal fuel expenses, including the fuel component of purchased power, and do not affect net income. The fuel and other cost recovery revenues increased in 2008 when compared to 2007 primarily as a result of the increase in fuel and purchased power expenses. The fuel and other cost recovery revenues increased in 2007 when compared to 2006 as a result of higher fuel costs. In 2006, fuel and other cost recovery revenues increased as compared to 2005 as a result of higher fuel costs and an increase in kilowatt-hours (KWH) generated.
Wholesale revenues from sales to non-affiliates will vary depending on the market cost of available energy compared to the cost of the Company and Southern Company system-owned generation, demand for energy within the Southern Company service territory, and availability of Southern Company system generation. Wholesale revenues from sales to non-affiliates increased $30.7 million, or 9.5%, in 2008 as compared to 2007 as a result of a $30.4 million increase in energy revenues, of which $40.4 million was associated with higher fuel prices and a $0.3��million increase in capacity revenues, partially offset by a $10.0 million decrease in KWH sales. Wholesale revenues from sales to non-affiliates increased $54.3 million, or 20.2%, in 2007 as compared to 2006 as a result of a $51.5 million increase in energy revenues, of which $32.0 million was associated with increased KWH sales and $19.5 million was associated with higher fuel prices, and a $2.8 million increase in capacity revenues. In 2006, wholesale revenues from sales to non-affiliates decreased $14.6 million, or 5.1%, compared to 2005. This decrease resulted from a $14.7 million decrease in energy revenues, of which $10.1 million was associated with decreased KWH sales and $4.6 million was associated with lower fuel prices.
Included in wholesale revenues from sales to non-affiliates are revenues from rural electric cooperative associations and municipalities located in southeastern Mississippi. The related revenues increased 8.3%, 12.6%, and 7.1%, in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. The 2008 increase was driven by higher fuel costs. The customer demand experienced by these utilities is determined by factors very similar to those experienced by the Company.

II-305


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Short-term opportunity energy sales are also included in sales for resale to non-affiliates. These opportunity sales are made at market-based rates (MBRs) that generally provide a margin above the Company’s variable cost to produce the energy.
Wholesale revenues from sales to affiliated companies within the Southern Company system will vary from year to year depending on demand, availability and cost of generating resources at each company. These affiliated sales and purchases are made in accordance with the Intercompany Interchange Contract (IIC), as approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Wholesale revenues from sales to affiliated companies increased 118.6% in 2008, when compared to 2007, decreased 39.5% in 2007, when compared to 2006, and increased 51.6% in 2006, when compared to 2005. These energy sales do not have a significant impact on earnings since the energy is generally sold at marginal cost.
Energy Sales
Changes in revenues are influenced heavily by the change in the volume of energy sold from year to year. KWH sales for 2008 and percent change by year were as follows:
                 
  KWHs Percent Change
  2008 2008 2007 2006
  (in millions)            
Residential  2,121   (0.6)%  0.8%  (2.8)%
Commercial  2,857   (0.7)  7.5   (1.8)
Industrial  4,187   (3.0)  4.2   9.1 
Other  39   0.3   4.9   (2.5)
 
Total retail  9,204   (1.7)  4.4   2.7 
 
Wholesale                
Non-affiliated  5,017   (3.3)  12.1   (3.9)
Affiliated  1,487   44.9   (38.9)  87.4 
 
Total wholesale  6,504   4.7   (1.5)  10.4 
 
Total energy sales  15,708   0.8   2.0   5.7 
 
Changes in retail energy sales are comprised of changes in electricity usage by customers, changes in weather, and changes in the number of customers. Residential energy sales decreased 0.6% in 2008 compared to 2007, due to decreased customer usage mainly due to a slowing economy and milder summer weather. Residential energy sales increased 0.8% in 2007 compared to 2006, primarily due to more favorable weather conditions, which offset slow customer growth. Residential energy sales decreased 2.8% in 2006 compared to 2005, due to mild winter weather and fewer customers following Hurricane Katrina.
Commercial energy sales decreased 0.7% in 2008 compared to 2007, due to mild weather and slower than expected customer growth due to the economy. Commercial energy sales increased 7.5% in 2007 compared to 2006, due to customer growth mainly in the casino and hotel industries. Commercial energy sales decreased 1.8% in 2006 compared to 2005, primarily due to commercial customer losses following Hurricane Katrina.
Industrial energy sales decreased 3.0% in 2008 compared to 2007, due to lower customer use from a slowing economy. Industrial energy sales increased 4.2% in 2007 compared to 2006, due to continued recovery after Hurricane Katrina. Industrial energy sales increased 9.1% in 2006 compared to 2005, primarily due to the recovery of load lost in 2005 resulting from Hurricane Katrina.
Wholesale energy sales to non-affiliates decreased 3.3%, increased 12.1%, and decreased 3.9%, in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Included in wholesale sales from sales to non-affiliates are sales from rural electric cooperative associations and municipalities located in southeastern Mississippi. Compared to the prior year, KWH sales to these utilities decreased 0.9% in 2008 due to slowing growth and milder weather, increased 4.3% in 2007 due to growth in the service territory, and increased 8.9% in 2006 compared to 2005 due to growth in the service territory and recovery from Hurricane Katrina in 2006. KWH sales to non-territorial customers located outside Mississippi Power’s service territory decreased 9.6% in 2008 as compared to 2007 primarily due to lower off-system sales. KWH sales to non-territorial customers increased 41.0% in 2007 as compared to 2006 primarily due to more off-system sales. KWH sales to non-territorial customers decreased 33.0% percent in 2006 as compared to 2005 primarily due to less off-system sales. Wholesale sales to non-affiliates will vary depending on the market cost of available energy compared to the cost of the Company and

II-306


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Southern Company system-owned generation, demand for energy within the Southern Company service territory, and availability of Southern Company system generation.
Wholesale energy sales to affiliates increased 44.9% in 2008 as compared to 2007 primarily due to the availability of the Company’s lower cost generation resources sold to affiliated companies. Wholesale energy sales to affiliates decreased 38.9% in 2007 when compared to 2006 primarily due to a decrease in the Company’s generation and an increase in territorial sales, therefore, less available to sell to affiliate companies. Wholesale energy sales to affiliates increased 87.4% in 2006 when compared to 2005 primarily due to the availability of the Company’s lower cost generation resources sold to affiliated companies.
Fuel and Purchased Power Expenses
Fuel costs constitute the single largest expense for the Company. The mix of fuel sources for generation of electricity is determined primarily by demand, the unit cost of fuel consumed, and the availability of generating units. Additionally, the Company purchases a portion of its electricity needs from the wholesale market. Details of the Company’s electricity generated and purchased were as follows:
             
  2008 2007 2006
 
Total generation(millions of KWHs)
  14,324   14,119   14,224 
Total purchased power(millions of KWHs)
  2,091   2,084   1,718 
 
Sources of generation(percent) —
            
Coal  67   69   71 
Gas  33   31   29 
 
Cost of fuel, generated(cents per net KWH) —
            
Coal  3.52   2.92   2.52 
Gas  6.83   6.25   6.04 
 
Average cost of fuel, generated(cents per net KWH)
  4.43   3.78   3.34 
Average cost of purchased power(cents per net KWH)
  6.05   4.60   4.26 
 
Fuel and purchased power expenses were $713.1 million in 2008, an increase of $122.9 million, or 20.8%, above the prior year costs. This increase was primarily due to a $116.5 million increase in the cost of fuel and purchased power and a $6.4 million increase related to total KWHs generated and purchased. Fuel and purchased power expenses were $590.1 million in 2007, an increase of $78.3 million, or 15.3%, above the prior year costs. This increase was primarily due to a $63.8 million increase in the cost of fuel and purchased power and a $14.5 million increase related to total KWHs generated and purchased. In 2006, fuel and purchased power expenses were $511.9 million, an increase of $9.8 million, or 2.0%, above the prior year costs. This increase was primarily due to an increase of $9.7 million in the cost of fuel and purchased power.
Fuel expense increased $92.2 million in 2008 as compared to 2007. Approximately $86.1 million in additional fuel expenses resulted from higher coal, gas, and transportation prices and a $6.1 million increase in generation from Mississippi Power-owned facilities. Fuel expense increased $55.6 million in 2007 as compared to 2006. Approximately $56.8 million in additional fuel expenses resulted from higher coal, gas, transportation prices, and emission allowances, which were partially offset by a $1.2 million decrease in generation from Mississippi Power-owned facilities. Fuel expense increased $80.1 million in 2006 as compared to 2005 as a result of increases in fuel costs and an increase in generation. This increase in fuel expense is due to a $30.0 million increase in the cost of fuel due to higher coal, gas, transportation, and emission allowance prices and a $50.0 million increase related to more KWHs generated.
Purchased power expense increased $30.7 million, or 32.0%, in 2008 when compared to 2007. The increase was primarily due to an increase in the cost of purchased power. Purchased power expense increased $22.6 million, or 30.9%, in 2007 when compared to 2006. The increase was primarily due to an increase in the cost of purchased power and an increase in the amount of energy purchased which was partially due to a decrease in generation resulting from plant outages. Purchased power expense decreased $70.2 million, or 49%, in 2006 when compared to 2005. The decrease was primarily due to more generation being available to meet customer demand and a decrease in the cost of purchased power. Energy purchases vary from year to year depending on demand and the availability and cost of the Company’s generating resources. These expenses do not have a significant impact on earnings since the energy purchases are generally offset by energy revenues through the Company’s fuel cost recovery clause.

II-307


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Over the last several years, coal prices have been influenced by a worldwide increase in demand from developing countries, as well as increases in mining and fuel transportation costs. In the first half of 2008, coal prices reached unprecedented high levels primarily due to increased demand following more moderate pricing in 2006 and 2007. Despite these fluctuations, fuel inventories have been adequate and fuel supply markets have been sufficient to meet expected fuel requirements. Demand for natural gas in the United States also increased in 2007 and the first half of 2008. However, natural gas supplies increased in the last half of 2008 as a result of increased production and higher storage levels due in part to weak industrial demand. Both coal and natural gas prices moderated in the second half of 2008 as the result of a recessionary economy.
Fuel expenses generally do not affect net income, since they are offset by fuel revenues under the Company’s fuel cost recovery clause. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “PSC Matters — Fuel Cost Recovery” and Note 1 to the financial statements under “Fuel Costs” for additional information.
Other Operations and Maintenance Expenses
Total other operations and maintenance expenses increased $4.8 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 primarily due to a $6.9 million increase in transmission and distribution expenses, an increase in administrative expenses primarily resulting from the reclassification of System Restoration Rider (SRR) revenues of $3.8 million to expense pursuant to an order from the Mississippi PSC dated January 9, 2009, a $1.9 million increase in generation related environmental expenses, and a $1.1 million increase in generation operations and outage related expenses. These increases were partially offset by a $9.3 million reclassification of generation construction screening expenses to a regulatory asset upon the FERC acceptance of the wholesale filingexample, on October 24, 2008.
Total other operations and maintenance expenses increased $18.6 million from 2006 to 2007. Other operations expense increased $15.1 million, or 8.8%, in 2007 compared to 2006 primarily as a result of a $4.1 million increase in generation construction screening, a $3.3 million insurance recovery for storm restoration expense recognized in 2006, a $2.1 million increase in employee benefits primarily due to increase in medical expense, a $2.0 million increase in outside and other contract services, and a $2.0 million increase in scheduled production projects. Maintenance expense increased $3.5 million, or 5.2%, in 2007 when compared to 2006, primarily as a result of a $5.5 million increase in generation maintenance expense primarily due to outage work in 2007, partially offset by a $2.0 million decrease in transmission and distribution maintenance expenses due primarily to the deferral of these expenses pursuant to the regulatory accounting order from the Mississippi PSC.
In 2006, total other operations and maintenance expenses decreased $3.0 million compared to 2005. Other operations expense increased $1.9 million, or 1.1%, in 2006 compared to 2005 primarily as a result of a $1.8 million increase in distribution operations expense and a $1.5 million increase in employee benefit expenses, partially offset by a $1.0 million decrease in bad debt expense. Maintenance expense decreased $4.9 million, or 6.8%, in 2006, primarily due to the $3.4 million accrual of certain expenses arising from Hurricane Katrina related to the wholesale portion of the business in 2005 and the $2.8 million partial recovery of these expenses from the CDBG in 2006, partially offset by a $0.5 million increase in 2006 due to the increased operation of combined cycle units as gas costs decreased in 2006 when compared to 2005.
See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “PSC Matters — System Restoration Rider and — Storm Damage Cost Recovery” and “FERC Matters — Wholesale Rate Filing” herein for additional information.
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation and amortization expenses increased $10.7 million in 2008 compared to 2007 primarily due to a $5.7 million increase in amortization related to a regulatory liability recorded in 2003 that ended in December 2007 in connection with the Mississippi PSC’s accounting order on Plant Daniel capacity, a $2.9 million increase in depreciation expense primarily due to an increase in plant in service, and a $2.4 million increase for amortization of certain reliability-related maintenance costs deferred in 2007 in accordance with a Mississippi PSC order. Depreciation and amortization expenses increased $13.5 million in 2007 compared to 2006 due to a regulatory liability recorded in 2003 in connection with the Mississippi PSC’s accounting order on Plant Daniel capacity and an increase in amortization of environmental costs related to the approved ECO Plan. Depreciation and amortization expenses increased $13.3 million in 2006 compared to 2005 due to amortization related to a regulatory liability recorded in 2003 in connection with the Mississippi PSC’s accounting order on Plant Daniel capacity and the impact of a new depreciation study effective January 1, 2006. See Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Performance Evaluation Plan” and “Environmental Compliance Overview Plan” for additional information.

II-308


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Taxes Other Than Income Taxes
Taxes other than income taxes increased 7.9% in 2008 compared to 2007 primarily as a result of a $2.7 million increase in ad valorem taxes and a $1.3 million increase in municipal franchise taxes. Taxes other than income taxes decreased 0.9% in 2007 compared to 2006 primarily as a result of a $2.0 million decrease in ad valorem taxes, partially offset by a $1.5 million increase in municipal franchise taxes. In 2006, taxes other than income taxes increased 1.4% over the prior year primarily as a result of a $0.5 million increase in ad valorem taxes and a $0.3 million increase in municipal franchise taxes. The retail portion of the increase in ad valorem taxes is recoverable under the Company’s ad valorem tax cost recovery clause and, therefore, does not affect net income. The increase in municipal franchise taxes is directly related to the increase in total retail revenues.
Total Other Income and (Expense)
The $1.1 million decrease in total other income and (expense) in 2008 compared to 2007 is primarily due to higher charitable contributions of $3.1 million partially offset by $0.4 million increase in revenues from contracting work performed for customers, a $0.6 million decrease in other deductions, and a $0.6 million increase in allowance for equity funds used during construction. The $10.9 million increase in total other income and (expense) in 2007 compared to 2006 is primarily due to higher charitable contributions in 2006 as compared to 2007 and a gain on a contract termination approved by the FERC in 2007. The $8.6 million decrease in total other income and (expense) in 2006 compared to 2005 is primarily due to charitable contributions and higher interest rates on long-term debt.
Income Taxes
Income taxes decreased $3.4 million, or 6.7%, in 2008 primarily due to decreased pre-tax income, the amortization of a regulatory liability pursuant to a December 2007 regulatory accounting order from the Mississippi PSC, and a State of Mississippi manufacturing investment tax credit, partially offset by a decrease in the federal production activities deduction. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters” for additional information. Income taxes increased $3.7 million, or 7.8%, in 2007 primarily due to increased pre-tax income and lower federal and state tax credits. Income taxes increased $1.7 million, or 3.7%, in 2006 primarily due to increased pre-tax income, partially offset by higher federal and state tax credits. See Note 5 to the financial statements under “Effective Tax Rate.”
Effects of Inflation
The Company is subject to rate regulation that is based on the recovery of costs. PEP is based on annual projected costs, including estimates for inflation. When historical costs are included, or when inflation exceeds projected costs used in rate regulation or market- based prices, the effects of inflation can create an economic loss since the recovery of costs could be in dollars that have less purchasing power. In addition, the income tax laws are based on historical costs. The inflation rate has been relatively low in recent years and any adverse effect of inflation on the Company has not been significant.
FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL
General
The Company operates as a vertically integrated utility providing electricity to retail customers within its traditional service area located in southeast Mississippi and to wholesale customers in the southeastern United States. Prices for electricity provided by the Company to retail customers are set by the Mississippi PSC under cost-based regulatory principles. Retail rates and earnings are reviewed and may be adjusted periodically within certain limitations. Prices for wholesale electricity sales, interconnecting transmission lines and the exchange of electric power are regulated by the FERC. See ACCOUNTING POLICIES — “Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates — Electric Utility Regulation” herein and Note 3 to the financial statements under “FERC Matters” and “Retail Regulatory Matters” for additional information about regulatory matters.
The results of operations for the past three years are not necessarily indicative of future earnings potential. The level of the Company’s future earnings depends on numerous factors that affect the opportunities, challenges, and risks of the Company’s primary business of selling electricity. These factors include the Company’s ability to maintain a constructive regulatory environment that continues to allow for the recovery of all prudently incurred costs during a time of increasing costs. Future earnings in the near term will depend, in part, upon maintaining energy sales during the current economic downturn, which is subject to a number of factors. These factors include weather, competition, new energy contracts with neighboring utilities, energy conservation practiced by

II-309


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
customers, the price of electricity, the price elasticity of demand, and the rate of economic growth or decline in the Company’s service area. Recent recessionary conditions have negatively impacted sales growth. The timing and extent of the economic recovery will impact future earnings.
Environmental Matters
Compliance costs related to the Clean Air Act and other environmental statutes and regulations could affect earnings if such costs cannot continue to be fully recovered in rates on a timely basis. Environmental compliance spending over the next several years may exceed amounts estimated. Some of the factors driving the potential for such an increase are higher commodity costs, market demand for labor, and scope additions and clarifications. The timing, specific requirements, and estimated costs could also change as environmental statutes and regulations are adopted or modified. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Environmental Matters” for additional information.
New Source Review Actions
In November 1999, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) brought a civil action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, including Alabama Power and Georgia Power, alleging that these subsidiaries had violated the New Source Review (NSR) provisions of the Clean Air Act and related state laws at certain coal-fired generating facilities. After Alabama Power was dismissed from the original action for jurisdictional reasons, the EPA filed a separate action in January 2001 against Alabama Power in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. In these lawsuits, the EPA alleged that NSR violations occurred at eight coal-fired generating facilities operated by Alabama Power and Georgia Power, including one co-owned by the Company. The civil actions request penalties and injunctive relief, including an order requiring installation of the best available control technology at the affected units. The action against Georgia Power has been administratively closed since the spring of 2001, and the case has not been reopened.
In June 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama entered a consent decree between Alabama Power and the EPA, resolving a portion of the Alabama Power lawsuit relating to the alleged NSR violations at Plant Miller. The consent decree required Alabama Power to pay $100,000 to resolve the government’s claim for a civil penalty and to donate $4.9 million of sulfur dioxide emission allowances to a nonprofit charitable organization. It also formalized specific emissions reductions to be accomplished by Alabama Power, consistent with other Clean Air Act programs that require emissions reductions. In August 2006, the district court in Alabama granted Alabama Power’s motion for summary judgment and entered final judgment in favor of Alabama Power on the EPA’s claims related to all of the remaining plants: Plants Barry, Gaston, Gorgas, and Greene County.
The plaintiffs appealed the district court’s decision to16, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the EleventhFifth Circuit where the appeal was stayed pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in a similar case against Duke Energy. The Supreme Court issued its decision in the Duke Energy case in April 2007, and in December 2007, the Eleventh Circuit vacated the district court’s decision in the Alabama Power case and remanded the case back to the district court for consideration of the legal issues in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Duke Energy case. On July 24, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama granted partial summary judgment in favor of Alabama Power regarding the proper legal test for determining whether projects are routine maintenance, repair, and replacement and therefore are excluded from NSR permitting. The decision did not resolve the case, and the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
The Company believes that it complied with applicable laws and the EPA regulations and interpretations in effect at the time the work in question took place. The Clean Air Act authorizes maximum civil penalties of $25,000 to $37,500 per day, per violation at each generating unit, depending on the date of the alleged violation. An adverse outcome in either of these cases could require substantial capital expenditures or affect the timing of currently budgeted capital expenditures that cannot be determined at this time and could possibly require payment of substantial penalties. Such expenditures could affect future results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.
Carbon Dioxide Litigation
New York Case
In July 2004, three environmental groups and attorneys general from eight states, each outside of Southern Company’s service territory, and the corporation counsel for New York City filed complaints inreversed the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New YorkMississippi’s dismissal of private party claims against Southern Companycertain oil, coal, chemical, and four other electric power companies. The complaints allegeutility companies alleging damages as a result of Hurricane Katrina. In reversing the dismissal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that the companies’ emissions of

II-310


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, contribute to global warming, which the plaintiffs assert is a public nuisance. Under common law public and private nuisance theories, the plaintiffs seek a judicial order (1) holding each defendant jointly and severally liable for creating, contributing to, and/or maintaining global warming and (2) requiring each of the defendants to cap its emissions of carbon dioxide and then reduce those emissions by a specified percentage each year for at least a decade. The plaintiffs have not, however, requested that damages be awarded in connection withstanding to assert their claims. Southern Company believesnuisance, trespass, and negligence claims and none of these claims are without merit and notes thatbarred by the political question doctrine. The Company is not currently a party to this litigation but was named as a defendant in an amended complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. In September 2005,which was rendered moot in August 2007 by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted Southern Company’s andMississippi when such court dismissed the other defendants’ motions to dismiss these cases. The plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in October 2005, but no decision has been issued. The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Kivalina Case
On February 26, 2008, the Native Village of Kivalina and the City of Kivalina filed a suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against several electric utilities (including Southern Company), several oil companies, and a coal company. The plaintiffs are the governing bodies of an Inupiat village in Alaska. The plaintiffs contend that the village is being destroyed by erosion allegedly caused by global warming that the plaintiffs attribute to emissions of greenhouse gases by the defendants. The plaintiffs assert claims for public and private nuisance and contend that the defendants have acted in concert and are therefore jointly and severally liable for the plaintiffs’ damages. The suit seeks damages for lost property values and for the cost of relocating the village, which is alleged to be $95 million to $400 million. On June 30, 2008, all defendants filed motions to dismiss this case. Southern Company believes that these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims.original matter. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.

II-321


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Environmental Statutes and Regulations
General
The Company’s operations are subject to extensive regulation by state and federal environmental agencies under a variety of statutes and regulations governing environmental media, including air, water, and land resources. Applicable statutes include the Clean Air Act; the Clean Water Act; the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; the Toxic Substances Control Act; the Emergency Planning & Community Right-to-Know Act; the Endangered Species Act; and related federal and state regulations. Compliance with these environmental requirements involves significant capital and operating costs, a major portion of which is expected to be recovered through existing ratemaking provisions. Through 2008,2009, the Company had invested approximately $202$224 million in capital projects to comply with these requirements, with annual totals of $22 million, $41 million, and $17 million for 2009, 2008, and $4.8 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. The Company expects that capital expenditures to assure compliance with existing and new statutes and regulations will be an additional $28$11 million, $61$59 million, and $111$128 million for 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2011,2012, respectively. The Company’s compliance strategy can be affected by changes to existing environmental laws, statutes, and regulations,regulations; the cost, availability, and existing inventory of emission allowances,emissions allowances; and the Company’s fuel mix. Environmental costs that are known and estimable at this time are included in capital expenditures discussed under FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY — “Capital Requirements and Contractual Obligations” herein.
Compliance with any new federal or state legislation or regulations related to global climate change, air quality, coal combustion byproducts, including coal ash, or other environmental and health concerns could also significantly affect the Company. Although new or revised environmental legislation or regulations could affect many areas of the Company’s operations, the full impact of any such changes cannot be determined at this time.
Air Quality
Compliance with the Clean Air Act and resulting regulations has been and will continue to be a significant focus for the Company. Through 2008,2009, the Company had spent approximately $102$107 million in reducing sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions and in monitoring emissions pursuant to the Clean Air Act. Additional controls are currently being installed at several plants to further reduce air emissions, maintain compliance with existing regulations, and meet new requirements.

II-311


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
In 2004, theThe EPA designated nonattainment areas underregulates ground level ozone through implementation of an eight-hour ozone air quality standard. No area within the Company’s service area wasis currently designated as nonattainment under the eight-hour ozone standard. OnIn March 12, 2008, however, the EPA issued a final rule establishing a more stringent eight-hour ozone standard, which will likelyand on January 6, 2010, the EPA proposed further reductions in the standard. The EPA is expected to finalize the revised standard in August 2010 and require state implementation plans for any nonattainment areas by December 2013. The revised eight-hour ozone standard is expected to result in designation of new nonattainment areas within the Company’s service territory.
On December 8, 2009, the EPA also proposed revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for SO2. The EPA is expected to publish those designations in 2010, and require state implementation plans for any nonattainment areas by 2013.
The EPA issuedfinalize the final Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) in March 2005. This cap-and-trade rule addresses power plantrevised SO2 and NOx emissions that were found to contribute to nonattainment of the eight-hour ozone and fine particulate matter standardsstandard in downwind states. June 2010.
Twenty-eight eastern states, including the StateStates of Mississippi and Alabama, are subject to the requirements of the rule.Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). The rule calls for additional reductions of NOx and/or SO2 to be achieved in two phases, 2009/2010 and 2015. OnIn July 11, 2008 in response to petitions brought by certain states and regulated industries challenging particular aspects of CAIR,December 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a decision vacatingdecisions invalidating certain aspects of CAIR, in its entirety and remanding it to the EPA for further action consistent with its opinion. On December 23, 2008, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit altered its July decision in response to a rehearing petition and remanded CAIR to the EPA without vacatur, thereby leavingbut left CAIR compliance requirements in place while the EPA develops a revised rule. The StateStates of Mississippi has an EPA-approved plan for implementing this rule. Theseand Alabama have completed plans to implement CAIR, and emissions reductions will beare being accomplished by the installation of additional emissionemissions controls at the Company’s coal-fired facilities and/or by the purchase of emissionemissions allowances. The full impact of the court’s remand and the outcome of EPA’s future rulemakingEPA is expected to issue a proposed CAIR replacement rule in response cannot be determined at this time.July 2010.
The Clean Air Visibility Rule (formerly called the Regional Haze Rule) was finalized in July 2005. The2005, with a goal of this rule is to restorerestoring natural visibility conditions in certain areas (primarily national parks and wilderness areas) by 2064. The rule involves (1) the application of Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) to certain sources built between 1962 and 1977, and (2) the application of any additional emissions reductions which may be deemed necessary for each designated area to achieve reasonable progress by 2018 toward the natural conditions goal. Thereafter,goal by 2018 and for each 10-year planningten-year period additional emissions reductions will be required to continue to demonstrate reasonable progress in each area during that period.thereafter. For power plants, the Clean Air Visibility Rule allows states to determine that the CAIR satisfies BART requirements for SO2 and NOx. Extensive studies were performed for each, and no additional controls beyond CAIR are anticipated to be necessary at any of the Company’s affected units to demonstrate that additional particulate matter controls are not necessary under BART. The states of Alabama and Mississippi have determined that no additional SO2controls necessary under BART.facilities. States have completed or are currently completing implementation plans that contain strategies for BART compliance and any other measures required to achieve the first phase of reasonable progress.

II-322


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The EPA is currently developing a Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) rule for coal and oil-fired electric generating units, which will likely address numerous Hazardous Air Pollutants, including mercury. In March 2005, the EPA issued the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), a cap and trade program for the reduction of mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants. In February 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the CAMR. In a separate proceeding in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the EPA entered into a proposed consent decree that requires the EPA to issue a proposed MACT rule by March 16, 2011 and a final rule by November 16, 2011.
The impacts of the eight-hour ozone standards and nonattainment designations, andfuture revisions to CAIR, the SO2 standard, the Clean Air Visibility Rule, and the MACT rule for electric generating units on the Company cannot be determined at this time and will depend on the specific provisions of the final rules, resolution of any pending legal challenges, and the development and implementation of rules at the state level. However, these additional regulations could result in significant additional compliance costs that could affect future unit retirement and replacement decisions and results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.
The Company has developed and continually updates a comprehensive environmental compliance strategy to assess compliance obligations associated with the continuing and new environmental requirements discussed above. As part of this strategy, the Company plans to install additional SO2and NOx emissionemissions controls within the next several years to ensure continued compliance with applicable air quality requirements.
In March 2005, the EPA published the final Clean Air Mercury Rule, a cap-and-trade program for the reduction of mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants. The final Clean Air Mercury Rule was challenged in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The petitioners alleged that the EPA was not authorized to establish a cap-and-trade program for mercury emissions and instead the EPA must establish maximum achievable control technology standards for coal-fired electric utility steam generating units. On February 8, 2008, the court ruled in favor of the petitioners and vacated the Clean Air Mercury Rule. The Company’s overall environmental compliance strategy relies primarily on a combination of SO2 and NOx controls to reduce mercury emissions. Any significant changes in the strategy will depend on the outcome of any appeals and/or future federal and state rulemakings. Future rulemakings necessitated by the court’s decision could require emission reductions more stringent than those required by the Clean Air Mercury Rule.

II-312


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Water Quality
In July 2004, the EPA published its final technology-based regulations under the Clean Water Act for the purpose of reducingto reduce impingement and entrainment of fish, shellfish, and other forms of aquatic life at existing power plant cooling water intake structures. The rules require baseline biological information and, perhaps, installation of fish protection technology near some intake structures at existing power plants. In January 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit overturned and remanded several provisions of the rule, including the use of cost-benefit analysis toin the EPA for revisions. The decision has beenrule was ultimately appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. On April 1, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the EPA could consider costs in arriving at its standards and in providing variances from those standards for existing intake structures. The EPA is now in the process of revising the regulations. While the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision may ultimately result in greater flexibility for demonstrating compliance with the standards, the full impactscope of thesethe regulations will depend on subsequent legal proceedings, further rulemaking by the EPA the results of studies and analyses performed as part of the rules’ implementation, and the actual requirements established by state regulatory agencies and, therefore, cannot be determined at this time.
On December 28, 2009, the EPA announced its determination that revision of the current effluent guidelines for steam electric power plants is warranted and proposed a plan to adopt such revisions by 2013. New wastewater treatment requirements are expected and may result in the installation of additional controls on certain Company facilities. The impact of revised guidelines will depend on the studies conducted in connection with the rulemaking, as well as the specific requirements of the final rule, and, therefore, cannot be determined at this time.
Environmental Remediation
The Company must comply with other environmental laws and regulations that cover the handling and disposal of waste and releases of hazardous substances. Under these various laws and regulations, the Company could incur substantial costs to clean up properties. The Company conducts studies to determine the extent of any required cleanup and has recognized in its respective financial statements the costs to clean up known sites. Amounts for cleanup and ongoing monitoring costs were not material for any year presented. The Company could be liable for some or all required cleanup costs for additional sites that may require environmental remediation. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Environmental Matters — Environmental Remediation” for additional information.
Global Climate IssuesCoal Combustion Byproducts
Federal legislative proposals that would impose mandatory requirements relatedThe EPA is currently evaluating whether additional regulation of coal combustion byproducts is merited under federal solid and hazardous waste laws. The EPA has collected information from the electric utility industry on surface impoundment safety and conducted on-site inspections at three Southern Company system facilities as part of its evaluation. The Company has a routine and robust inspection program in place to greenhouse gas emissions and renewable energy standards continueensure the integrity of its coal ash surface impoundments. The EPA is expected to be strongly consideredissue a proposal regarding additional regulation of coal combustion byproducts in Congress, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has been identified as a high priority by the current Administration.early 2010. The ultimate outcomeimpact of these proposalsadditional regulations on the Company will depend on the specific provisions of the final rule and cannot be determined at this time; however, mandatory restrictionstime. However, additional regulation of coal combustion byproducts could have a significant impact on the Company’s greenhouse gas emissionsmanagement, beneficial use, and disposal of such byproducts and could result in significant additional compliance costs that could affect future unit retirement and replacement decisions and results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.

II-323


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Global Climate Issues
Federal legislative proposals that would impose mandatory requirements related to greenhouse gas emissions, renewable energy standards, and energy efficiency standards continue to be considered in Congress, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has been identified as a high priority by the current Administration. On June 26, 2009, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES), which would impose mandatory greenhouse gas restrictions through implementation of a cap and trade program, a renewable energy standard, and other measures, was passed by the House of Representatives. ACES would require reductions of greenhouse gas emissions on a national basis to a level that is 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, 42% below 2005 levels by 2030, and 83% below 2005 levels by 2050. In addition, ACES would provide for renewable energy standards of 6% by 2012 and 20% by 2020. Similar legislation is being considered by the Senate. The financial and operational impact of such legislation, if enacted, will depend on a variety of factors. These factors include the specific greenhouse gas emissions limits or renewable energy requirements, the timing of implementation of these limits or requirements, the level of emissions allowances allocated and the level that must be purchased, the purchase price of emissions allowances, the development and commercial availability of technologies for renewable energy and for the reduction of emissions, the degree to which offsets may be used for compliance, provisions for cost containment (if any), the impact on coal and natural gas prices, and cost recovery through regulated rates. There can be no assurance that any legislation will be enacted or as to the ultimate form of any legislation. Additional or alternative legislation may be adopted as well.
In April 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the EPA has authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles. On December 15, 2009, the EPA published a final determination, which became effective on January 14, 2010, that certain greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles endanger public health and welfare due to climate change. On September 28, 2009, the EPA published a proposed rule regulating greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles under the Clean Air Act. The EPA has stated that once this rule is currently developing its responseeffective, it will cause carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to this decision. Regulatory decisions that will follow from this response may have implicationsbecome regulated pollutants under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) preconstruction permit program and the Title V operating permit program, which both apply to power plants. As a result, the construction of new facilities or the major modification of existing facilities could trigger the requirement for both newa PSD permit and existingthe installation of the best available control technology for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. The EPA also published a proposed rule governing how these programs would be applied to stationary sources, such asincluding power plants.plants, on October 27, 2009. The EPA has stated that it expects to finalize these proposed rules in March 2010. The ultimate outcome of the endangerment finding and these rulemaking activitiesproposed rules cannot be determined at this time; however, as withtime and will depend on additional regulatory action and any legal challenges.
International climate change negotiations under the current legislative proposals,United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change also continue. A nonbinding agreement was announced during the most recent round of negotiations in December 2009 that included a pledge from both developed and developing countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. The outcome and impact of the international negotiations cannot be determined at this time.
Although the outcome of federal, state, or international initiatives cannot be determined at this time, mandatory restrictions on the Company’s greenhouse gas emissions couldor requirements relating to renewable energy or energy efficiency on the federal or state level are likely to result in significant additional compliance costs, thatincluding significant capital expenditures. These costs could affect future unit retirement and replacement decisions, and could result in the retirement of a significant number of coal-fired generating units. See Item 1 — BUSINESS — “Rate Matters — Integrated Resource Planning” for additional information. Also, additional compliance costs and costs related to unit retirements could affect results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates. Further, higher costs that are recovered through regulated rates could contribute to reduced demand for electricity, which could negatively impact results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition.
In addition, some states are considering or have undertaken actions to regulate and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For example, on June 25, 2008, Florida’s Governor signed comprehensive energy-related legislation that includes authorization for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to adopt rules for a cap-and-trade regulatory program to address greenhouse gastotal carbon dioxide emissions from the fossil fuel-fired electric utilities, conditioned upon their ratificationgenerating units owned by the legislature no sooner than the 2010 legislative session.  This legislation also authorizes the Florida PSCCompany were approximately 12 million metric tons. The preliminary estimate of carbon dioxide emissions from these units in 2009 is approximately 10 million metric tons. The level of carbon dioxide emissions from year to adopt a renewable portfolio standard for public utilities, subject to legislative ratification. The impact of any similar legislationyear will be dependent on the Company will depend onlevel of generation and mix of fuel sources, which is determined primarily by demand, the future development, adoption, legislative ratification, implementation, and potential legal challenges to rules governing greenhouse gas emissions and mandates regarding the useunit cost of renewable energy,fuel consumed, and the ultimate outcome cannot be determined at this time.
International climate change negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change also continue. Current efforts focus on a potential successor to the Kyoto Protocol for the post 2012 timeframe, with a conclusion to this roundavailability of negotiations targeted for the end of 2009. The outcome and impact of the international negotiations cannot be determined at this time.generating units.
The Company is actively evaluating and developing electric generating technologies with lower greenhouse gas emissions. This includes theThese include proposed construction of an advanced Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycleintegrated coal gasification combined cycle (IGCC) unit with approximately 50%65% carbon capture in Kemper County, Mississippi. The Company is currently considering additional projects and is pursuing research into the costs and viability of other renewable technologies for the Southeast.

II-313II-324


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
FERC Matters
Market-Based Rate Authority
The Company has authorization from the FERC to sell power to non-affiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices. Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based contract with an affiliate.
In December 2004, the FERC initiated a proceeding to assess Southern Company’s generation dominance within its retail service territory. The ability to charge market-based rates in other markets is not an issue in the proceeding. Any new market-based rate sales byAugust 2008, the Company in Southern Company’s retail service territory entered into during a 15-month refund period that ended in May 2006 could be subject to refund to a cost-based rate level.
In November 2007, the presiding administrative law judge issued an initial decision regarding the methodology to be used in the generation dominance tests. The proceedings are ongoing. The ultimate outcome of this generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined, but an adverse decision by the FERC in a final order could require the Company to charge cost-based rates for certain wholesale sales in the Southern Company retail service territory, which may be lower than negotiated market-based rates, and could also result in total refunds of up to $8.4 million, plus interest. The Company believes that there is no meritorious basis for an adverse decision in this proceeding and is vigorously defending itself in this matter.
In June 2007, the FERC issued its final rule in Order No. 697 regarding market-based rate authority. The FERC generally retained its current market-based rate standards. Responding to a number of requests for rehearing, the FERC issued Order No. 697-A on April 21, 2008 and Order No. 697-B on December 12, 2008. These orders largely affirmed the FERC’s prior revision and codification of the regulations governing market-based rates for public utilities. In accordance with the orders, Southern Company submitted to the FERC an updated market power analysis on September 2, 2008 related to its continued market-based rate authority. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
On October 17, 2008, Southern Company filed with the FERC a revised market-based rate (MBR) tariff and a new cost-based rate (CBR) tariff.   The revised MBR tariff provides for a “must offer” energy auction whereby Southern Company offers all of its available energy for sale in a day-ahead auction and an hour-ahead auction with reserve prices not to exceed the CBR tariff price, after considering Southern Company’s native load requirements, reliability obligations, and sales commitments to third parties. All sales under the energy auction would be at market clearing prices established under the auction rules. The new CBR tariff provides for a cost-based price for wholesale sales of less than a year. On December 18, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the MBR tariff subject to certain revisions to the auction proposal. On January 21, 2009, Southern Company made a compliance filing that accepted all the conditions of the MBR tariff order. When this order becomes final, Southern Company will have 30 days to implement the wholesale auction. On December 31, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the CBR tariff subject to providing additional information concerning one aspect of the tariff. On January 30, 2009, Southern Company filed a response addressing the FERC inquiry to the CBR tariff order. Implementation of the energy auction in accordance with the MBR tariff order is expected to adequately mitigate going forward any presumption of market power that Southern Company may have in the Southern Company retail service territory. The timing of when the FERC may issue the final orders on the MBR and CBR tariffs and the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Wholesale Rate Filing
On August 29, 2008, Mississippi Power filed with the FERC a request for revised wholesale electric tariff and rates. Prior to making this filing, Mississippi Powerthe Company reached a settlement with all of its customers who take service under the tariff. This settlement agreement was filed with the FERC as part of the request. The settlement agreement provided for an increase in annual base wholesale revenues in the amount of $5.8 million, effective January 1, 2009. In addition, the settlement agreement allows Mississippi Powerthe Company to increase its annual accrual for the wholesale portion of property damage to $303,000 per year, to defer any property damage costs prudently incurred in excess of the wholesale property damage reserve balance, and to defer the wholesale portion of the generation screening and evaluation costs associated with the IGCC project to be located in Kemper County Mississippi. The settlement agreement also provided that Mississippi Powerthe Company will not seek a change in wholesale
full-requirements rates before November 1, 2010, except for changes associated with the fuel adjustment clause and the energy cost management clause (ECM), changes associated with property damages that exceed the amount in the wholesale property damage reserve, and changes associated with costs and expenses associated with environmental requirements affecting fossil fuel generating facilities. OnIn October 24, 2008, Mississippi

II-314


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Powerthe Company 2008 Annual Report
Power received notice that the FERC had accepted the filing effective November 1, 2008, and the revised monthly charges were applied beginning January 1, 2009. As result of the order, the Company reclassified $9.3 million of previously expensed generation screening and evaluation costs to a regulatory asset. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle” for additional information.
PSC Matters
Statewide Electric Generation Needs Review
OnIn April 30, 2008, in accordance with the Mississippi Public Utility Act, the Mississippi PSC issued an order to develop, publicize, and keep current an analysis of the five-year long-range needs for expansion of facilities for the generation of electricity in the State of Mississippi. In its order, the Mississippi PSC directed all affected utilities to submit evidence in support of their forecasts and plans in accordance with the rules of the Mississippi PSC’s Public Utilities Rules of Practice and Procedure. Comments were filed on June 10, 2008, and hearings were held in August 2008.PSC. On January 16, 2009, the Company filed for a request for a Certificate of Public Convenience to construct generating capacity. On August 4, 2009, the Mississippi PSC ordered a two-part hearing process to evaluate the need for and the resources and cost of the new generating capacity separately. On November 9, 2009, the Mississippi PSC ordered that the need for new generating capacity existed. Hearings related to the appropriate resource to meet that need as well as cost recovery of that resource through application of the Baseload Act (described below) were held in February 2010. A decision on the resources and cost is expected to be made by May 1, 2010. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle” for additional information.
Mississippi Base LoadBaseload Construction Legislation
In the 2008 regular session of the Mississippi legislature, a bill was passed and signed by the Governor onin May 9, 2008 to enhance the Mississippi PSC’s authority to facilitate development and construction of base load generation in the State of Mississippi (Baseload Act). The Baseload Act authorizes, but does not require, the Mississippi PSC to adopt a cost recovery mechanism that includes in retail base rates, prior to and during construction, all or a portion of the prudently incurred pre-construction and construction costs incurred by a utility in constructing a base load electric generating plant. Prior to the passage of the Baseload Act, such costs would traditionally be recovered only after the plant was placed in service. The Baseload Act also provides for periodic prudence reviews by the Mississippi PSC and prohibits the cancellation of any such generating plant without the approval of the Mississippi PSC. In the event of cancellation of the construction of the plant without approval of the Mississippi PSC, the Baseload Act authorizes the Mississippi PSC to make a public interest determination as to whether and to what extent the utility will be afforded rate recovery for costs incurred in connection with such cancelled generating plant. The effect of this legislation on Mississippi Powerthe Company cannot now be determined.
Performance Evaluation Plan
In May 2004, the Mississippi PSC approved the Company’s request to reclassify 266 megawatts (MWs) of Plant Daniel Units 3 and 4 capacity to jurisdictional cost of service effective January 1, 2004, and authorized the Company to include the related costs and revenue credits in jurisdictional rate base, cost of service, and revenue requirement calculations for purposes of retail rate recovery. In the May 2004 order establishing the Company’s forward-looking Rate Schedule PEP, the Mississippi PSC ordered that the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff and the Company review the operations of the PEP in 2007. By mutual agreement, this review was deferred until 2008 and is currently ongoing. The outcome ofcontinued into 2009. On March 2, 2009, concurrent with this review, cannot now be determined.the annual PEP evaluation filing for 2009 was suspended. On August 3, 2009, the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff and the Company filed a joint report with the Mississippi PSC proposing

II-325


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
several changes to the PEP. On November 9, 2009, the Mississippi PSC approved the revised PEP, which resulted in a lower performance incentive under the PEP and therefore smaller and/or less frequent rate changes in the future. On November 16, 2009, the Company resumed annual evaluations and filed its annual PEP filing for 2010 under the revised PEP, which resulted in a lower allowed return on investment but no rate change.
In April 2007, the Mississippi PSC issued an order allowing the Company to defer certain reliability related maintenance costs beginning January 1, 2007 and recover them evenly over a four-year period beginning January 1, 2008. These costs related to maintenance that was needed as follow-up to emergency repairs that were made subsequent to Hurricane Katrina. At December 31, 2007, the Company had incurred and deferred the retail portion of $9.5 million of such costs. At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had a balance of the deferred retail portion of $7.1$4.7 million with $2.4$2.3 million included in current assets as other regulatory assets and $4.7$2.4 million included in long-term other regulatory assets.
In December 2007, the Company submitted its annual PEP filing for 2008, which resulted in a rate increase of 1.983% or $15.5 million annually, effective January 2008. In December 2006, the Company submitted its annual PEP filing for 2007, which resulted in no rate change.
In December 2007, the Company received an order from the Mississippi PSC requiring it to defer $1.4 million associated with the retail portion of certain tax credits and favorable adjustments related to permanent differences pertaining to its 2006 income tax returns filed in September 2007. These tax differences were recorded in a regulatory liability included in the current portion of other regulatory liabilities and were amortized ratably over the twelve month period beginning January 2008.

II-315


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
On March 14, 2008, the Company submitted its annual PEP lookback filing for 2007, which recommended no surcharge or refund. At the conclusion of the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff’s review of the PEP lookback filing for 2007, the Company and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff jointly submitted a stipulation to the Mississippi PSC which recommended no surcharge or refund.
The Mississippi Public Utilities Staff, pursuant to the Mississippi PSC’s 2004 order approving the current PEP plan, is reviewing PEP to determine if any modifications should be made to the plan. Concurrent with this review, the annual PEP evaluation filing for 2009 was delayed by order of the Mississippi PSC and was scheduled to be filed on or before March 9, 2009. On February 23, 2009, however, the Company requested that the Mississippi PSC issue an order suspending the 2009 PEP evaluation filing to continue the scheduled review of the plan. The Company does not anticipate that suspending the PEP filing for 2009 will have a material impact on 2009 earnings. The Company anticipates that, as a result of the required review, changes to the plan will be made. Annual evaluations would resume for 2010 under a revised PEP plan. The final outcome cannot be determined at this time. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Retail Regulatory Matters Performance Evaluation Plan” for more information on PEP.
System Restoration Rider
In September 2006, the Company filed with the Mississippi PSC a request to implement a SRR to increase the Company’s cap on the property damage reserve and to authorize the calculation of an annual property damage accrual based on a formula. The purpose of the SRR is to provide for recovery of costs associated with property damage (including certain property insurance and the costs of self insurance) and to facilitate the Mississippi PSC’s review of these costs. In November 2007, the Company along with the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff agreed and stipulated to a revised SRR calculation method that would no longer require the Mississippi PSC to set a cap on the property damage reserve or to authorize the calculation of an annual property damage accrual. Under the revised SRR calculation method, the Mississippi PSC would periodically agree on SRR revenue levels that would be developed based on historical data, expected exposure, type and amount of insurance coverage excluding insurance costs, and other relevant information.
On January 9, 2009, the Mississippi PSC issued an order accepting the stipulation and the revised SRR calculation method. The applicable SRR rate level will be adjusted every three years, unless a significant change in circumstances occurs such that the Company and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff or the Mississippi PSC deems that a more frequent change would be appropriate. The Company will submit annual filings setting forth SRR-related revenues, expenses, and investment for the projected filing period, as well as the true-up for the prior period. As a result, the December 2008 retail regulatory liability of $6.8 million was reclassified to the property damage reserve. On February 2, 2009, the Company submitted its 2009 SRR rate filing with the Mississippi PSC, which proposed that the 2009 SRR rate level remain at zero and the Company be allowed to accrue approximately $4.0 million to the property damage reserve in 2009. On September 10, 2009, the Mississippi PSC issued an order requiring Mississippi Power to develop SRR factors designed to reduce SRR revenue by approximately $1.5 million from November 2009 to March 2010 under the new rate. On January 29, 2010, the Company submitted its 2010 SRR rate filing with the Mississippi PSC, which proposed that the Company be allowed to accrue approximately $3.0 million to the property damage reserve in 2010. The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
Environmental Compliance Overview Plan
On February 3, 2009,12, 2010, the Company submitted its 20092010 ECO Plan Noticenotice which proposes an increase in annual revenues for the Company of 19 cents per 1,000 KWH for residential customers.approximately $3.9 million. In its 2010 ECO filing, the Company is proposing to change the true-up provision of the ECO rate schedule to consider actual revenues collected in addition to actual costs. The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined. On February 1, 2008,3, 2009, the Company filed with the Mississippi PSCsubmitted its annual2009 ECO Plan evaluation for 2008. After the filing of the ECO Plan evaluation, the regulations addressing mercury emissions were altered by a decision issued by the U.S. Court of Appealsnotice which proposed an increase in annual revenues for the DistrictCompany of Columbia Circuit on February 8, 2008.approximately $1.5 million. On April 7, 2008,June 19, 2009, the Company filed with the Mississippi PSC a supplemental ECO Plan evaluation in which the projects included in the ECO Plan evaluation on February 1, 2008 being undertaken primarily for mercury control were removed. In this supplemental ECO Plan filing, the Company requested a 15 cent per 1,000 KWH decrease for retail residential customers. The Mississippi PSC approved the supplemental ECO Plan evaluation on June 11, 2008, with the new rates effective in June 2008. In April 2007, the Mississippi PSC approved the Company’s 2007 ECO Plan, which included an 86 cents per 1,000 KWH increase for retail residential customers. This increase represented an addition of approximately $7.5 million in annual revenues for the Company. The new rates were effective in April 2007.2009.
Fuel Cost Recovery
The Company establishes, annually, a retail fuel cost recovery factor that is approved by the Mississippi PSC. Over the past several years, the Company has continued to experience higher than expected fuel costs for coal and natural gas. The Company is required to file for an adjustment to the retail fuel cost recovery factor annually; such filing occurred in November 2008. On December 29, 2008, the2009. The Mississippi PSC held a hearing onapproved the Company’s proposed increase in itsretail fuel cost recovery factor. On February 11,factor on December 15, 2009, with the hearing examiner submitted a formal recommendation to the Mississippi PSC for approval of the factor as filed, with recovery proposed for the remaining calendar months of 2009. Any over or under recovery of fuel costs for 2009 would be addressednew rates effective in the

II-316


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Company’s 2010 fuel cost recovery filing.January 2010. The recommendation is under review by the Mississippi PSC at this time; therefore, the final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined. The proposed retail fuel cost recovery factor will result in an annual increasedecrease in an amount equal to 12.2%11.3% of total 20082009 retail revenue. At December 31, 2008,2009, the amount of underover recovered retail fuel costs included in the balance sheetsheets was $36.0$29.4 million compared to $24.5$36.0 million under recovered at December 31, 2007.2008. The Company also has a wholesale Municipal and Rural Associations (MRA) and a Market BaseBased (MB) fuel cost recovery factor. Effective January 1, 2009,2010, the wholesale MRA fuel rate increaseddecreased, resulting in an

II-326


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
annual increasedecrease in an amount equal to 13.9%20.9% of total 20082009 MRA revenue. Effective February 1, 2009,2010, the wholesale MB fuel rate increaseddecreased, resulting in an annual increasedecrease in an amount equal to 16.7%16.9% of total 20082009 MB revenue. At December 31, 2008,2009, the amount of underover recovered wholesale MRA and MB fuel costs included in the balance sheets was $16.8 million and $2.4 million compared to $15.4 million and $3.7 million, compared to $13.7 million and $2.3 million, respectively, under recovered at December 31, 2007.2008. The Company’s operating revenues are adjusted for differences in actual recoverable fuel cost and amounts billed in accordance with the currently approved cost recovery rate. Accordingly, this increasedecrease to the billing factor will have no significant effect on the Company’s revenues or net income, but will increasedecrease annual cash flow.
OnIn October 7, 2008, the Mississippi PSC opened a docket to investigate and review interest and carrying charges under the fuel adjustment clause for utilities within the State of Mississippi including the Company. A hearingOn March 4, 2009, the Mississippi PSC issued an order to apply the prime rate in calculating the carrying costs on the retail over or under recovery balances related to fuel cost recovery. On May 20, 2009, the Company filed the carrying cost calculation methodology as part of its compliance filing.
In August 2009, the Mississippi PSC engaged an independent professional audit firm to conduct an audit of the Company’s fuel-related expenditures included in the fuel adjustment clause and the ECM clause of 2008 and 2009. The audit was held November 6, 2008 to hear testimony regardingcompleted in December 2009. There were no audit findings identified in the method of calculating carrying charges on over and under recoveries of fuel-related costs. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.audit.
Storm Damage Cost Recovery
In August 2005, Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast of the United States and caused significant damage within the Company’s service area. The estimated total storm restoration costs relating to Hurricane Katrina through December 31, 2007 ofwere $302.4 million, which was net of expected insurance proceeds of approximately $77 million, without offset for the property damage reserve of $3.0 million, wasmillion. Such costs were affirmed by the Mississippi PSC in June 2006, and the Company was ordered to establish a regulatory asset for the retail portion. The Mississippi PSC issued an order directing the Company to file an application with the MDAMississippi Development Authority (MDA) for a CDBG.Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). In October 2006, the Company received from the MDA a CDBG in the amount of $276.4 million, which was allocated to both the retail and wholesale jurisdictions. In the same month, the Mississippi PSC issued a financing order that authorized the issuance of system restoration bonds for the remaining $25.2 million of the retail portion of storm recovery costs not covered by the CDBG. These funds were received in June 2007. The Company affirmed the $302.4 million total storm costs incurred as of December 31, 2007. TheOn March 2, 2009, the Company plans to filefiled with the Mississippi PSC its final accounting of the restoration cost relating to Hurricane Katrina and the storm operations center by the end of the first quarter 2009, at which time thecenter. The final net retail receivable of approximately $3.2 million is expected to be recovered.recovered in 2010.
Income Tax Matters
Legislation
On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). Major tax incentives in the ARRA include an extension of bonus depreciation and multiple renewable energy incentives. These incentives, which could have a significant impact on the Company’s future cash flow and net income. Additionally,income of the Company. The Company’s cash flow reduction to 2009 tax payments as a result of the bonus depreciation provisions of the ARRA includes programswas approximately $14 million. On December 8, 2009, President Obama announced proposals to accelerate job growth that include an extension of the bonus depreciation provision for renewable energy,the ARRA for 2010, which could have a significant impact on the future cash flow and net income of the Company.
On October 27, 2009, Southern Company and its subsidiaries received notice that an award of $165 million had been granted, of which $25 million related to the Company, under the ARRA grant application for transmission and smart grid enhancement, fossil energydistribution automation and research,modernization projects pending final negotiations. The Company continues to assess the other financial implications of the ARRA.
The U.S. House of Representatives and energy efficiency and conservation. the U.S. Senate have passed separate bills related to healthcare reform. Both bills include a provision that would make Medicare Part D subsidy reimbursements taxable. If enacted into law, this provision could have a significant negative impact on the Company’s net income. See Note 2 to the financial statements under “Other Postretirement Benefits” for additional information.
The ultimate impact of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Internal Revenue Code Section 199 Domestic Production DeductionIncome Tax Matters
The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 created a tax deduction for a portion of income attributable to U.S. production activities as defined in Section 199 (production activities deduction) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Internal Revenue Code).amended. The deduction is equal to a stated percentage of qualified production activities net income. The percentage is phased in over the years 2005 through 2010 with a 3% rate applicable to the years

II-327


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
2005 and 2006, a 6% rate applicable for the years 2007 through 2009, and a 9% rate thereafter. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has not clearly defined a methodology for calculating this deduction. However, Southern Company has agreed with the IRS on a calculation methodology and signed a closing agreement on December 11, 2008. Therefore, the Company reversed the unrecognized tax benefit and adjusted the deduction to conform to the agreement. The net impact of the reversal of the unrecognized tax benefits combined with the application of the new methodology had no material effect on the Company’s financial statements. See Note 5 to the financial statements under “Effective Tax Rate” for additional information.

II-317


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle
On January 16, 2009, the Company filed for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity with the Mississippi PSC to allow construction of a new electric generating plant located in Kemper County, Mississippi. The plant would utilize an advanced coal IGCC technology with an output capacity of 582 megawatts.MWs. The Kemper IGCC will use locally mined lignite (an abundant, lower heating value coal) from a proposed mine adjacent to the plant as fuel. This certificate, if approved by the Mississippi PSC, would authorize the Company to acquire, construct, and operate the Kemper IGCC and related facilities. The Kemper IGCC, subject to federal and state environmental reviews and certain regulatory approvals, is expected to begin commercial operation in November 2013.May 2014. As part of its filing, the Company has requested certain rate recovery treatment in accordance with the base load construction legislation. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “PSC Matters — Mississippi Base Load Construction Legislation” herein for additional information.Baseload Act.
The Company filed an application in June 2006 with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for certain tax credits available to projects using clean coal technologies under the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The DOE subsequently certified the Kemper IGCC, and in November 2006 the IRS allocated Internal Revenue Code Section 48A tax credits of $133 million to the Company. On May 11, 2009, the Company received notification from the IRS formally certifying these tax credits. The utilization of these credits is dependent upon meeting the certification requirements for the Kemper IGCC, including an in-service date no later than November 2013.May 2014. The Company has secured all environmental reviews and permits necessary to commence construction of the Kemper IGCC and has entered into a binding contract for the steam turbine generator, completing two milestone requirements for the Section 48A credits.
OnIn February 14, 2008, the Company also requested that the DOE transfer the remaining funds previously granted to a cancelled Southern Company project that would have been located in Orlando, Florida. OnIn December 12, 2008, an agreement was reached to assign the remaining funds to the Kemper IGCC. The estimated construction cost of the Kemper IGCC is approximately $2.2$2.4 billion, which is net of $220$245 million related to funding to be received from the DOE related to project construction. The remaining DOE funding of $50$25 million is projected to be used for demonstration over the first few years of operation.
On April 6, 2009, the Governor of the State of Mississippi signed into law a bill that will provide an ad valorem tax exemption for a portion of the assessed value of all property utilized in certain electric generating facilities with integrated gasification process facilities. This tax exemption, which may not exceed 50% of the total value of the project, is for projects with a capital investment from private sources of $1 billion or more. The Company expects the Kemper IGCC, including the gasification portion, to be a qualifying project under the law.
Beginning in December 2006, the Mississippi PSC has approved the Company’s requested accounting treatment to defer the costs associated with the Company’s generation resource planning, evaluation, and screening activities as a regulatory asset. OnIn December 22, 2008, the Company requested an amendment to its original order that would allow these costs to continue to be charged to and remain in a regulatory asset until January 1, 2010. In its application,On April 6, 2009, the Company reported that it anticipated spending approximately $61 millionreceived an accounting order from the Mississippi PSC directing the Company to continue to charge all generation resource planning, evaluation, and screening costs to regulatory assets including those costs associated with activities to obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity and costs necessary and prudent to preserve the availability, economic viability, and/or required schedule of the Kemper IGCC generation resource planning, evaluation, and screening activities until the Mississippi PSC makes findings and determination as to the recovery of the Company’s prudent expenditures. The Mississippi PSC’s determination of prudence for the Company’s pre-construction costs is scheduled to occur by or before May 31, 2009. At2010. As of December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had spent $42.3a total of $73.5 million ofassociated with the $61Company’s generation resource planning, evaluation, and screening activities, including regulatory filing costs. Costs incurred for the year ended December 31, 2009 totaled $31.2 million of which $3.7as compared to $24.2 million related to land purchases capitalized.for the year ended December 31, 2008. Of the remaining amount, $0.8total $73.5 million, was expensed and $37.8$68.5 million was deferred in other regulatory assets.assets, $4.0 million was related to land purchases capitalized, and $1.0 million was expensed.
On June 5, 2009, the Mississippi PSC issued an order initiating an evaluation of the Kemper IGCC and establishing a two-phase procedural schedule. On August 4, 2009, the Mississippi PSC ordered a two-part hearing process to evaluate the need for and the resources and cost of the new generating capacity separately. On November 9, 2009, the Mississippi PSC issued an order that found the Company has a demonstrated need for additional capacity of approximately 304 MWs to 1,276 MWs based on an analysis of expected load forecasts, costs, and anticipated retirements. Hearings related to the appropriate resource to meet that need as well as cost recovery of that resource through application of the Baseload Act were held in February 2010. A decision on the resources and cost recovery is expected to be made by May 1, 2010.

II-328


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
On September 15, 2009, South Mississippi Electric Power Association (SMEPA) signed a non-binding letter of intent to explore the acquisition of an interest in the Kemper IGCC. The Company and SMEPA are evaluating a combination of a joint ownership arrangement and a power purchase agreement which would provide SMEPA with up to 20% of the capacity and associated energy output from the Kemper IGCC.
The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
Other Matters
OnIn February 15, 2008, the Company received notice of termination from South Mississippi Electric Power Association (SMEPA)SMEPA of an approximately 100 MW territorial wholesale market basedmarket-based contract effective March 31, 2011 which will result in a decrease in annual revenues of approximately $12 million. OnIn December 17, 2008, the Company entered into a 10-year power supply agreement with SMEPA for approximately 152 MW.MWs. This contract is effective April 1, 2011, upon approval from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Rural Utilities Service. This contract is expected to increase the Company’s annual territorial wholesale base revenues by approximately $16.1 million. On June 3, 2009, Mississippi Power’s 10-year power supply agreement with SMEPA for approximately 152 MWs effective April 1, 2011 was approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Rural Utilities Service.
The Company is involved in various other matters being litigated and regulatory matters that could affect future earnings. In addition, the Company is subject to certain claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company’s business activities are subject to extensive governmental regulation related to public health and the environment.environment, such as regulation of air emissions and water discharges. Litigation over environmental issues and claims of various types, including property damage, personal injury, common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of environmental requirements such as opacity and air and water quality standards, has increased generally throughout the United States. In particular, personal injury, and other claims for damages caused by alleged exposure to hazardous materials, and common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas and other emissions, have become more frequent. The ultimate outcome of such pending or potential litigation against the Company cannot be predicted at this time; however, for current proceedings not specifically reported herein, management does not anticipate that the liabilities, if any, arising from such current proceedings would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial statements. See Note 3 to the financial statements for information regarding material issues.

II-318


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The Company prepares its financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Significant accounting policies are described in Note 1 to the financial statements. In the application of these policies, certain estimates are made that may have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations and related disclosures. Different assumptions and measurements could produce estimates that are significantly different from those recorded in the financial statements. Senior management has reviewed and discussed critical accounting policies and estimates described below with the Audit Committee of Southern Company’s Board of Directors.
Electric Utility Regulation
The Company is subject to retail regulation by the Mississippi PSC and wholesale regulation by the FERC. These regulatory agencies set the rates the Company is permitted to charge customers based on allowable costs. As a result, the Company applies Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Statement No. 71, “Accounting for the Effects of Certain Types of Regulation” (SFAS No. 71),accounting standards which requiresrequire the financial statements to reflect the effects of rate regulation. Through the ratemaking process, the regulators may require the inclusion of costs or revenues in periods different than when they would be recognized by a non-regulated company. This treatment may result in the deferral of expenses and the recording of related regulatory assets based on anticipated future recovery through rates or the deferral of gains or creation of liabilities and the recording of related regulatory liabilities. The application of SFAS No. 71the accounting standards has a further effect on the Company’s financial statements as a result of the estimates of allowable costs used in the ratemaking process. These estimates may differ from those actually incurred by the Company; therefore, the accounting estimates inherent in specific costs such as depreciation and pension and postretirement benefits have less of a direct impact on the Company’s results of operations than they would on a non-regulated company.
As reflected in Note 1 to the financial statements, significant regulatory assets and liabilities have been recorded. Management reviews the ultimate recoverability of these regulatory assets and liabilities based on applicable regulatory guidelines and accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. However, adverse legislative, judicial, or regulatory actions could materially impact the amounts of such regulatory assets and liabilities and could adversely impact the Company’s financial statements.

II-329


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Contingent Obligations
The Company is subject to a number of federal and state laws and regulations, as well as other factors and conditions that potentially subject it to environmental, litigation, income tax, and other risks. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL herein and Note 3 to the financial statements for more information regarding certain of these contingencies. The Company periodically evaluates its exposure to such risks and, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), records reserves for those matters where a non-tax-related loss is considered probable and reasonably estimable and records a tax asset or liability if it is more likely than not that a tax position will be sustained. The adequacy of reserves can be significantly affected by external events or conditions that can be unpredictable; thus, the ultimate outcome of such matters could materially affect the Company’s financial statements. These events or conditions include the following:
  Changes in existing state or federal regulation by governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, coal combustion byproducts, including coal ash, control of toxic substances, hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters;matters.
 
  Changes in existing income tax regulations or changes in IRS or state revenue department interpretations of existing regulations;regulations.
 
  Identification of additional sites that require environmental remediation or the filing of other complaints in which the Company may be asserted to be a potentially responsible party;party.
 
  Identification and evaluation of new or other potential lawsuits or complaints in which the Company may be named as a defendant;defendant.
 
  Resolution or progression of new or existing matters through the legislative process, the court systems, the IRS, state revenue departments, the FERC, or the EPA.

II-319


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Unbilled Revenues
Revenues related to the retail sale of electricity are recorded when electricity is delivered to customers. However, the determination of KWH sales to individual customers is based on the reading of their meters, which is performed on a systematic basis throughout the month. At the end of each month, amounts of electricity delivered to customers, but not yet metered and billed, are estimated. Components of the unbilled revenue estimates include total KWH territorial supply, total KWH billed, estimated total electricity lost in delivery, and customer usage. These components can fluctuate as a result of a number of factors including weather, generation patterns, and power delivery volume and other operational constraints. These factors can be unpredictable and can vary from historical trends. As a result, the overall estimate of unbilled revenues could be significantly affected, which could have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations.
Plant Daniel Operating Lease
As discussed in Note 7 to the financial statements under “Operating Leases — Plant Daniel Combined Cycle Generating Units,” the Company leases a 1,064 megawatt1,064-MW natural gas combined cycle facility at Plant Daniel (Facility) from Juniper Capital L.P. (Juniper). For both accounting and rate recovery purposes, this transaction is treated as an operating lease, which means that the related obligations under this agreement are not reflected in the balance sheets. See FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY — “Off-Balance Sheet Financing Arrangements” herein for further information. The operating lease determination was based on assumptions and estimates related to the following:
  Fair market value of the Facility at lease inception;
 
  The Company’s incremental borrowing rate;
 
  Timing of debt payments and the related amortization of the initial acquisition cost during the initial lease term;
 
  Residual value of the Facility at the end of the lease term;
 
  Estimated economic life of the Facility; and
 
  Juniper’s status as a voting interest entity.

II-330


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The determination of operating lease treatment was made at the inception of the lease agreement and is not subject to change unless subsequent changes are made to the agreement. However, the Company is also required to monitor Juniper’s ongoing status as a voting interest entity. Changes in that status could require the Company to consolidate the Facility’s assets and the related debt and to record interest and depreciation expense of approximately $37 million annually, rather than annual lease expense of approximately $26 million.
Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits
The Company’s calculation of pension and other postretirement benefits expense is dependent on a number of assumptions. These assumptions include discount rates, health care cost trend rates, expected long-term return on plan assets, mortality rates, expected salary and wage increases, and other factors. Components of pension and other postretirement benefits expense include interest and service cost on the pension and other postretirement benefit plans, expected return on plan assets and amortization of certain unrecognized costs and obligations. Actual results that differ from the assumptions utilized are accumulated and amortized over future periods and, therefore, generally affect recognized expense and the recorded obligation in future periods. While the Company believes that the assumptions used are appropriate, differences in actual experience or significant changes in assumptions would affect its pension and other postretirement benefits costs and obligations.
Key elements in determining the Company’s pension and other postretirement benefit expense in accordance with GAAP are the expected long-term return on plan assets and the discount rate used to measure the benefit plan obligations and the periodic benefit plan expense for future periods. The expected long-term return on postretirement benefit plan assets is based on the Company’s investment strategy, historical experience, and expectations for long-term rates of return that considers external actuarial advice. The Company determines the long-term return on plan assets by applying the long-term rate of expected returns on various asset classes to the Company’s target asset allocation. The Company discounts the future cash flows related to its postretirement benefit plans using a single-point discount rate developed from the weighted average of market-observed yields for high quality fixed income securities with maturities that correspond to expected benefit payments.
A 25 basis point change in any significant assumption would result in a $0.7 million or less change in the total benefit expense and a $13 million or less change in projected obligations.
New Accounting Standards
Variable Interest Entities
In June 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued new guidance of the consolidation of variable interest entities, which replaces the quantitative-based risks and rewards calculation for determining whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary in a variable interest entity with an approach that is primarily qualitative, requires ongoing assessments of whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity, and requires additional disclosures about an enterprise’s involvement in variable interest entities. The Company adopted this new guidance effective January 1, 2010, with no material impact on its financial statements.
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY
Overview
The Company’s financial condition remained stable at December 31, 2008.2009. Throughout the recent turmoil in the financial markets, the Company has maintained adequate access to capital without drawing on any of its committed bank credit arrangements used to support its commercial paper programs and variable rate pollution control revenue bonds. The Company has continued to issue commercial paper at reasonable rates. The Company intends to continue to monitor its access to short-term and long-term capital markets as well as its bank credit arrangements to meet future capital and liquidity needs. No material changes in bank credit arrangements have occurred although marketMarket rates for committed credit have increased, and the Company mayhas been and expects to continue to be subject to higher costs as its existing facilities are replaced or renewed. The Company’s interest costTotal committed credit fees for short-term debt has decreased as market short-term interest rates have declined. Thethe Company experienced no material counterparty credit losses as a resultaverage less than1/4 of the turmoil in the financial markets.1% per year. The ultimate impact on future financing costs as a result of the financial turmoil cannot be determined at this time. See “Sources of Capital” and “Financing Activities” herein for additional information.

II-320II-331


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
The Company’s investments in pension trust funds declined in valueremained stable as of December 31, 2008.2009. The Company expects that the earliest that cash may have to be contributed to the pension trust fund is 20112012 and such contribution could be significant; however, projections of the amount vary significantly depending on interpretations of and decisions related to federal legislation passed during 2008 as well as other key variables including future trust fund performance and cannot be determined at this time.
Net cash provided from operating activities in 2009 increased from 2008 by $76.2 million. The increase in net cash provided from operating activities was primarily due to an increase in cash related to higher fuel rates effective in March 2009 and a decrease in deferred income taxes. Net cash provided from operating activities in 2008 decreased from 2007 by $112.2 million. The decrease in net cash provided from operating activities was primarily due to the receipt of grant proceeds of $74.3 million in June 2007 and a decrease in operating activities related to receivables in 2008 in the amount of $49.5 million. The decrease in receivables is primarily due to the change in under recovered regulatory clause revenues of $24.7 million and a $24.1 million change in affiliate receivables. Also impacting operating activities were decreases related to fossil fuel stock of $33.3 million primarily due to increases in coal and coal in-transit of $22.0 million and $15.6 million, respectively. These were offset by an increase in deferred income taxes and investment tax credits of $61.4 million. Net cash flowprovided from operating activities increased in 2007 compared to 2006 by $11.7 million primarily due to the Company’s receipt of $74.3 million in bond proceeds during 2007 related to Hurricane Katrina recovery, of which $60 million was used to fund the property damage reserve and $14.3 million was used to recover retail operations and maintenance storm restoration cost. The $153.0
Net cash used for investing activities totaled $119.4 million increase in net cash from operating activities for 20062009 compared to 2005 resulted$155.8 million for 2008. The $36.4 million decrease was primarily from $120.3 million received from the CDBG program.
due to a decrease in property additions. The $55.3 million increase in net cash used for investing activities in 2008 was primarily due to a $12.1 million increase in construction payables and a $27.6 million increase due to the capital portion of Hurricane Katrina grant proceeds received in 2007. The change in net cash used for investing activities in 2007 compared to 2006 of $107.0 million was primarily due to a $117.8 million reduction in the sources of funds related to Hurricane Katrina capital relatedcapital-related grant proceeds received in 2006 and bond proceeds. The change
Net cash used for financing activities totaled $8.6 million in net cash2009 compared to $78.9 million that was provided from investingfinancing activities in 2006 compared to 2005 of $176.92008. The $87.5 million decrease was primarily due to a $152.8$42.6 million receiptdecrease in notes payable and a $40 million decrease in long-term debt as a result of capital related grant and bond proceeds relateda March 2009 senior note redemption, when compared to Hurricane Katrina.
the corresponding period in 2008. Net cash provided from financing activities totaled $78.9 million in 2008 compared to $105.5 million that was used in financing activities for the corresponding period in 2007. The $184.5 million increase in net cash provided from financing activities was primarily due to the $80 million long-term bank loan issued to the Company in March 2008, the $50 million senior notes issued in November 2008, and the $36 million redemption of the long-term debt to an affiliated trust in the first nine months of 2007. Notes payable increased by $57.8 million primarily due to additional borrowings from commercial paper. Net cash used for financing activities totaled $105.5 million in 2007 compared to $211.5 million in 2006. This decrease in net cash used for financing activities is primarily due to a decrease in the use of funds related to notes payable of $109.3 million. Net cash used for financing activities totaled $211.5 million in 2006 compared to net cash provided from financing activities of $135.9 million in 2005. This increase in net cash used for financing activities is primarily due to an increase in the use of funds related to notes payable of $352.9 million.
Significant changes in the balance sheet as of December 31, 2008,2009 compared to 20072008 include an increase in fossilcash of $42.6 million. Under recovered regulatory clause revenues decreased by $55.0 million primarily due to lower fuel costs and the implementation of higher fuel rates in 2009. Fossil fuel inventory of $38.1increased $41.7 million primarily due to increases in coal inventory and coal in-transitemissions allowances of $22.0$30.1 million and $15.6$11.6 million, respectively. Prepaid income taxes increased by $31.2 million and total property, plant, and equipment increased by $32.4 million. Other regulatory assets, deferred increased $135.9by $37.4 million primarily due to mark to market losses on forward gas contracts and the changeincrease in the market value of pension plan assets. Prepaid pension cost decreased $66.1 million duespending related to the decline in the market value of pension plan assets.Kemper IGCC. Securities due within one year increased by $40.1decreased $39.9 million primarily due to senior notes maturing during the first quarter 2009. Notes payable decreased by $26.3 million primarily due to a decrease in commercial paper borrowings. Over recovered regulatory clause liabilities increased by $48.6 million primarily due to lower fuel costs and the implementation of higher fuel rates in 2009. Long-term debt increased by $88.5$123.0 million primarily due to an $80 million long-term bank loan issued to the Company in March 2008 and $50 million inissuance of senior notes issued in November 2008, partially offset by the $36 million redemption of the long-term debt to an affiliated trust in 2007. The increase in employeefirst quarter 2009. Employee benefit obligations of $53.9increased $19.6 million and the decrease in other regulatory liabilities of $68.1 million were primarily due to the decline in the market value of pension assets. See Note 2 to the financial statements under “Pension Plans” for additional information.
The Company’s ratio of common equity to total capitalization, excluding long-term debt due within one year, decreased from 66.1%61.2% in 20072008 to 61.2%55.6% at December 31, 2008.2009. The Company has received investment grade credit ratings from the major rating agencies with respect to debt preferred securities, and preferred stock. See SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA for additional information regarding the Company’s security ratings. See “Credit Rating Risk” herein for additional information.

II-332


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Sources of Capital
The Company plans to obtain the funds required for construction and other purposes from sources such as operating cash flows, security issuances, term loans, short-term borrowings, and capital contributions from Southern Company. See “Capital Requirements and Contractual Obligations” herein and Note 3 to the financial statements under “Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle” for

II-321


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
additional information. The amount, type, and timing of any financings, if needed, will depend upon regulatory approval, prevailing market conditions, and other factors.
The issuance of securities by the Company is subject to regulatory approval by the FERC. Additionally, with respect to the public offering of securities, the Company files registration statements with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (1933 Act). The amounts of securities authorized by the FERC, as well as the amounts registered under the 1933 Act, are continuously monitored and appropriate filings are made to ensure flexibility in the capital markets.
The Company obtains financing separately without credit support from any affiliate. The Southern Company system does not maintain a centralized cash or money pool. Therefore, funds of the Company are not commingled with funds of any other company.
To meet short-term cash needs and contingencies, the Company has various sources of liquidity. At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had approximately $22.4$65 million of cash and cash equivalents and $98.5$156 million of unused credit arrangements with banks. Subsequent to December 31, 2008, the Company increased an existing credit agreement by $10 million. The facility matures in the third quarter of 2009 and allows for the execution of a two year term loan. See Note 6 to the financial statements under “Bank Credit Arrangements” for additional information.
The Company may also meet short-term cash needs through a Southern Company subsidiary organized to issue and sell commercial paper at the request and for the benefit of the Company and the other traditional operating companies. Proceeds from such issuances for the benefit of the Company are loaned directly to the Company and are not commingled with proceeds from such issuances for the benefit of any other operating company. The obligations of each company under these arrangements are several; there is no cross affiliate credit support. At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had $26.3 million ofno commercial paper outstanding.
Financing Activities
During the fourthfirst quarter of 2008,2009, the Company issued senior notes totaling $50$125 million. Proceeds were used to repay at maturity the Company’s $40 million aggregate principal amount of Series F Floating Rate Senior Notes due March 9, 2009 and to repay a portion of the Company’s short-term indebtedness.
In September 2008, the Company was required to purchase a total of approximately $7.9 million of variable rate pollution control revenue bonds that were tendered by investors. In December 2008, the bonds were successfully remarketed.
Also during 2008, the Company entered into a three-year term loan agreement of $80 million. Proceeds were used to repay a portion of the Company’s short-term indebtedness and for other corporate purposes, including the Company’s continuous construction program.
In addition to any financings that may be necessary to meet capital requirements and contractual obligations, the Company plans to continue, when economically feasible, a program to retire higher-cost securities and replace these obligations with lower-cost capital if market conditions permit.
Off-Balance Sheet Financing Arrangements
In 2001, the Company began an initial 10-year term of a lease agreement for a combined cycle generating facility built at Plant Daniel. In June 2003, the Company entered into a restructured lease agreement for the Facility with Juniper, as discussed in Note 7 to the financial statements under “Operating Leases — Plant Daniel Combined Cycle Generating Units.” Juniper has also entered into leases with other parties unrelated to the Company. The assets leased by the Company comprise less than 50% of Juniper’s assets. The Company does not consolidate the leased assets and related liabilities, and the lease with Juniper is considered an operating lease. Accordingly, the lease is not reflected in the balance sheets.
The initial lease term ends in 2011, and the lease includes a renewal and a purchase option based on the cost of the Facility at the inception of the lease, which was approximately $370 million. The Company is required to amortize approximately 4% of the initial acquisition cost over the initial lease term. EighteenIn April 2010, 18 months prior to the end of the initial lease, the Company must notify Juniper if the lease will be terminated. The Company may elect to renew the lease for 10 years. If the lease is renewed, the agreement calls for the Company to amortize an additional 17% of the initial completion cost over the renewal period. Upon termination of the lease, at the Company’s option, it may either exercise its purchase option or the Facility can be sold to a third party.

II-322


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The lease also provides for a residual value guarantee, approximately 73% of the acquisition cost, by the Company that is due upon termination of the lease in the event that the Company does not renew the lease or purchase the Facility and that the fair market value is less than the unamortized cost of the Facility. See Note 7 to the financial statements under “Operating Leases — Plant Daniel Combined Cycle Generating Units” for additional information.

II-333


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Credit Rating Risk
The Company does not have any credit arrangements that would require material changes in payment schedules or terminations as a result of a credit rating downgrade. There are certain contracts that could require collateral, but not accelerated payment, in the event of a credit rating change to BBB- and/or Baa3 or below. These contracts are for physical electricity purchases, and sales, fuel purchases, fuel transportation and storage, emissions allowances, and energy price risk management. At December 31, 2008,2009, the maximum potential collateral requirements under these contracts at BBB- and/or Baa3 rating were approximately $6$5 million. At December 31, 2008,2009, the maximum potential collateral requirements under these contracts at a rating below BBB- and/or Baa3 were approximately $149$370 million. Included in these amounts are certain agreements that could require collateral in the event that one or more Southern Company system power pool participants has a credit rating change to below investment grade. Generally, collateral may be provided by a Southern Company guaranty, letter of credit, or cash. Additionally, any credit rating downgrade could impact the Company’s ability to access capital markets, particularly the short-term debt market.
On September 2, 2009, Moody’s Investors Service (Moody’s) affirmed the credit ratings of the Company’s senior unsecured notes and commercial paper of A1/P-1, respectively, and revised the rating outlook for the Company to negative. On September 4, 2009, Fitch Ratings, Inc. affirmed the Company’s senior unsecured notes and commercial paper ratings of AA-/F1+, respectively, and maintained a stable rating outlook for the Company. On October 6, 2009, Standard and Poor’s Rating Services, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. (S&P) affirmed the credit rating of the Company’s senior unsecured notes and its short-term rating of A/A-1, respectively, and maintained its stable ratings outlook.
Market Price Risk
Due to cost-based rate regulation, the Company has limited exposure to market volatility in interest rates, commodity fuel prices, and prices of electricity. To manage the volatility attributable to these exposures, the Company nets the exposures, where possible, to take advantage of natural offsets and enters into various derivative transactions for the remaining exposures pursuant to the Company’s policies in areas such as counterparty exposure and hedging practices. The Company’s policy is that derivatives are to be used primarily for hedging purposes and mandates strict adherence to all applicable risk management policies. Derivative positions are monitored using techniques that include, but are not limited to, market valuation, value at risk, stress testing, and sensitivity analysis.
The Company does not currently hedge interest rate risk. The weighted average interest rate on $160$120 million of variable rate long-term debt at December 31, 2008January 1, 2010 was 1.79%0.54%. If the Company sustained a 100 basis point change in interest rates for all unhedged variable rate long-term debt, the change would affect annualized interest expense by approximately $1.6$1.2 million at December 31, 2008. See NotesJanuary 1, and 6 to the financial statements under “Financial Instruments” for additional information.2010.
To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in electricity prices, the Company enters into fixed-price contracts for the purchase and sale of electricity through the wholesale electricity market. At December 31, 2008,2009, exposure from these activities was not material to the Company’s financial statements.
In addition, per the guidelines of the Mississippi PSC, the Company has implemented a fuel-hedging program. At December 31, 2008,2009, exposure from these activities was not material to the Company’s financial statements.
The changes in fair value of energy-related derivative contracts were as follows at December 31:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 Changes Changes Changes Changes
 Fair Value Fair Value
 (in millions) (in thousands)
Contracts outstanding at the beginning of the period, assets (liabilities), net  $2.0 $(6.3) $(51,985) $1,978 
Contracts realized or settled   (30.7) 2.5  53,905  (30,639)
Current period changes(a)
  (23.3) 5.8   (43,654)  (23,324)
Contracts outstanding at the end of the period, assets (liabilities), net  $(52.0) $2.0  $(41,734) $(51,985)
(a) Current period changes also include the changes in fair value of new contracts entered into during the period, if any.

II-334


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The decreasechange in the fair value positions of the energy-related derivative contracts for the year ended December 31, 20082009 was $54.0an increase of $10.3 million, substantially all of which is due to natural gas positions. ThisThe change is attributable to both the volume of million British thermal units (mmBtu) and prices of natural gas. At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had a net hedge volume of 28.9 billion cubic feet (Bcf)23.7 million mmBtu with a weighted average contract cost of approximately $1.89$1.80 per million British thermal units (mmBtu)mmBtu above market prices, and 15.6 Bcf28.9 million mmBtu at December 31, 20072008 with a

II-323


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
weighted average contract cost of approximately $0.09$1.89 per mmBtu belowabove market prices. The majority of the natural gas hedgeshedge settlements are recovered through the Company’s fuel cost recovery clauses.ECM clause.
At December 31, 2008,2009, the net fair value of energy-related derivative contracts by hedge designation was reflected in the financial statements as assets/(liabilities) as follows:
                
 2008 2007
Asset (Liability) Derivatives 2009 2008
 (in millions) (in thousands)
Regulatory hedges $(52.0) $1.3  $(41,746) $(51,956)
Cash flow hedges  0.9   142 
Non-accounting hedges   (0.2)
Not designated 12  (171)
Total fair value $(52.0) $2.0  $(41,734) $(51,985)
Energy-related derivative contracts which are designated as regulatory hedges significantly relate to the Company’s fuel hedging programs,program, where gains and losses are initially recorded as regulatory liabilities and assets, respectively, and then are included in fuel expense as they are recovered through the energy cost managementECM clause. Gains and losses on energy-related derivatives designated as cash flow hedges are used to hedge anticipated purchases and sales and are initially deferred in other comprehensive income before being recognized in income in the same period as the hedged transaction. Gains and losses on energy-related derivative contracts that are not designated or fail to qualify as hedges are recognized in the statements of income as incurred. The pre-tax gains/(losses) reclassified from other comprehensive income to revenue and fuel expense were not material for any period presented and are not expected to be material for 2009.2010. Additionally, there was no material ineffectiveness recorded in earnings for any period presented. The Company has energy-related hedges in place up to and including 2012.
Unrealized pre-tax gains and lossesgains/(losses) from energy-related derivative contracts recognized in income were not material for any year presented.
The maturities of the energy-related derivative contracts and the level of the fair value hierarchy in which they fall at December 31, 20082009 are as follows:
                                
 December 31, 2008 December 31, 2009
 Fair Value Measurements Fair Value Measurements
 Total Maturity Total Maturity
 Fair Value Year 1 Years 2&3 Years 4&5 Fair Value Year 1 Years 2&3 Years 4&5
 (in millions) (in thousands)
Level 1 $ $ $ $  $ $ $ $ 
Level 2  (52.0)  (27.9)  (19.0)  (5.1)  (41,734)  (18,996)  (22,600)  (138)
Level 3          
Fair value of contracts outstanding at end of period $(52.0) $(27.9) $(19.0) $(5.1) $(41,734) $(18,996) $(22,600) $(138)
As part of the adoption of FASB Statement No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (SFAS No. 157) to increase consistency and comparability in fair value measurements and related disclosures, the table above now uses the three-tier fair value hierarchy, as discussed in Note 9 to the financial statements, as opposed to the previously used descriptions “actively quoted,” “external sources,” and “models and other methods.” The three-tier fair value hierarchy focuses on the fair value of the contract itself, whereas the previous descriptions focused on the source of the inputs. Because the Company uses over-the-counter contracts that are not exchange traded but are fair valued using prices which are actively quoted, and thus fall into Level 2. See Note 9 to the valuations of those contracts now appear in Level 2; previously they were shown as “actively quoted.”financial statements for further discussion on fair value measurement.
The Company is exposed to market price risk in the event of nonperformance by counterparties to the energy-related derivative contracts. The Company’s practice is to enterCompany only enters into agreements and material transactions with counterparties that have investment grade credit ratings by Moody’s and Standard & Poor’sS&P or with counterparties who have posted collateral to cover potential credit exposure. Therefore, the Company does not anticipate market risk exposure from nonperformance by the counterparties. For additional information, see NotesNote 1 and 6 to the financial statements under “Financial Instruments.”Instruments” and Note 10 to the financial statements.

II-324II-335


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Capital Requirements and Contractual Obligations
The construction program of the Company is currently estimated to be $163 million for 2009, $467$472 million for 2010, and $1,004$661 million for 2011.2011, and $1.3 billion for 2012. These estimates include costs for new generation construction. Environmental expenditures included in these estimated amounts are $28$11 million, $61$59 million, and $111$128 million for 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2011,2012, respectively. The construction program is subject to periodic review and revision, and actual construction costs may vary from these estimates because of numerous factors. These factors include: changes in business conditions; revised load growth estimates; storm impacts; changes in environmental statutes and regulations; changes in FERC rules and regulations; Mississippi PSC approvals; changes in legislation; the cost and efficiency of construction labor, equipment, and materials; project scope and design changes; and the cost of capital. In addition, there can be no assurance that costs related to capital expenditures will be fully recovered. See Note 3 to the financial statements under “Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle” for additional information.
In addition, as discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements, the Company provides postretirement benefits to substantially all employees and funds trusts to the extent required by the FERC.
Other funding requirements related to obligations associated with scheduled maturities of long-term debt, as well as the related interest, derivative obligations, preferred stock dividends, leases, and other purchase commitments, are as follows. See Notes 1, 6, 7, and 710 to the financial statements for additional information.

II-325II-336


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Contractual Obligations
                            
                     2011- 2013- After Uncertain   
 2010- 2012- After   2010 2012 2014 2014 Timing(d) Total 
 2009 2011 2013 2013 Total  
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
 
Long-term debt(a)
  
Principal $41,230 $82,767 $50,633 $237,695 $412,325  $ $80,000 $50,000 $362,694 $ $492,694 
Interest 17,016 31,884 28,920 185,393 263,213  21,643 42,479 38,761 202,726  305,609 
Preferred stock dividends(b)
 1,733 3,465 3,465  8,663  1,733 3,465 3,465   8,663 
Energy-related derivative obligations(c)
 29,291 18,939 5,118  53,348  19,454 22,641 202   42,297 
Operating leases (d)
 40,149 62,486 2,133 2,223 106,991 
Purchase commitments(e)
 
Capital(f)
 162,817 1,471,106   1,633,923 
Unrecognized tax benefits and
interest(d)
 290    2,967 3,257 
Operating leases (e)
 40,326 47,588 17,441 1,613 106,968 
Capital leases(f)
 1,330 2,070    3,400 
Purchase commitments(g)
 
Capital(h)
 471,511 1,935,149    2,406,660 
Coal 368,572 298,787 86,800 7,800 761,959  316,006 434,084 30,805   780,895 
Natural gas(g)
 191,576 194,642 44,608 204,944 635,770 
Long-term service agreements(h)
 11,884 24,410 25,147 99,738 161,179 
Postretirement benefits trust(i)
 125 251   376 
Natural gas(i)
 185,120 251,804 137,330 182,662  756,916 
Long-term service agreements(j)
 13,159 27,201 28,097 74,518  142,975 
Postretirement benefits trust(k)
 230 459    689 
Total $864,393 $2,188,737 $246,824 $737,793 $4,037,747  $1,070,802 $2,846,940 $306,101 $824,213 $2,967 $5,051,023 
(a) All amounts are reflected based on final maturity dates. The Company plans to continue to retire higher-cost securities and replace these obligations with lower-cost capital if market conditions permit. Variable rate interest obligations are estimated based on rates as of January 1, 2008,2010, as reflected in the statements of capitalization. Excludes capital lease amounts (shown separately).
 
(b) Preferred stock does not mature; therefore, amounts are provided for the next five years only.
 
(c) For additional information, see Notes 1 and 610 to the financial statements.
 
(d) The timing related to the realization of $3 million in unrecognized tax benefits and interest payments in individual years beyond 12 months cannot be reasonably and reliably estimated due to uncertainties in the timing of the effective settlement of tax positions. See Note 5 to the financial statements for additional information.
(e)The decrease from 2010-20112011-2012 to 2012-20132013-2014 is primarily a result of the Plant Daniel Operatingoperating lease contract that is scheduled to end during 2011. See Note 7 to the financial statements for additional information.
 
(e)(f)The capital lease of $6.4 million is being amortized over a five-year period ending in 2012.
(g) The Company generally does not enter into non-cancelable commitments for other operations and maintenance expenditures. Total other operations and maintenance expenses for 2009, 2008, and 2007 and 2006 were $247 million, $260 million, $255 million, and $237$255 million, respectively.
 
(f)(h) The Company forecasts capital expenditures over a three-year period. Amounts represent current estimates of total expenditures. At December 31, 2008,2009, significant purchase commitments were outstanding in connection with the construction program.
 
(g)(i) Natural gas purchase commitments are based on various indices at the time of delivery. Amounts reflected have been estimated based on the New York Mercantile Exchange future prices at December 31, 2008.2009.
 
(h)(j) Long-term service agreements include price escalation based on inflation indices.
 
(i)(k) The Company forecasts postretirement trust contributions over a three-year period. The Company expects that the earliest that cash may have to be contributed to the pension trust fund is 2011 and such contribution could be significant; however,2012. The projections of the amount vary significantly depending on interpretations of and decisions related to federal legislation passed during 2008 as well as other key variables including future trust fund performance and cannot be determined at this time. Therefore, no amounts related to the pension trust fund are included in the table. See Note 2 to the financial statements for additional information related to the pension and postretirement plans, including estimated benefit payments. Certain benefit payments will be made through the related trusts. Other benefit payments will be made from the Company’s corporate assets.

II-326II-337


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
The Company’s 20082009 Annual Report contains forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements concerning retail sales, growth, retail rates, storm damage cost recovery and repairs, fuel cost recovery and other rate actions, environmental regulations and expenditures, access to sources of capital, projections for postretirement benefit trust contributions, financing activities, start and completion of construction projects, impacts of the adoption of new accounting rules, completionimpact of construction projects,the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, impact of healthcare legislation, if any, estimated sales and purchases under new power sale and purchase agreements, and estimated construction and other expenditures. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “could,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “projects,” “predicts,” “potential,” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other similar terminology. There are various factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those suggested by the forward-looking statements; accordingly, there can be no assurance that such indicated results will be realized.
These factors include:
the impact of recent and future federal and state regulatory change, including legislative and regulatory initiatives regarding deregulation and restructuring of the electric utility industry, implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, environmental laws including regulation of water quality and emissions of sulfur, nitrogen, mercury, carbon, soot, or particulate matter, or coal combustion byproducts and other substances and also changes in tax and other laws and regulations to which the Company is subject, as well as changes in application of existing laws and regulations;
current and future litigation, regulatory investigations, proceedings, or inquiries, including FERC matters and EPA civil actions;
the effects, extent, and timing of the entry of additional competition in the markets in which the Company operates;
variations in demand for electricity, including those relating to weather, the general economy and recovery from the recent recession, population and business growth (and declines), and the effects of energy conservation measures;
available sources and costs of fuels;
effects of inflation;
ability to control costs;costs and avoid cost overruns during the development and construction of facilities;
investment performance of the Company’s employee benefit plans;
advances in technology;
state and federal rate regulations and the impact of pending and future rate cases and negotiations, including rate actions relating to fuel and storm restorationother cost recovery;recovery mechanisms;
internal restructuring or other restructuring options that may be pursued;
potential business strategies, including acquisitions or dispositions of assets or businesses, which cannot be assured to be completed or beneficial to the Company;
the ability of counterparties of the Company to make payments as and when due and to perform as required;
the ability to obtain new short- and long-term contracts with neighboring utilities;wholesale customers;
the direct or indirect effect on the Company’s business resulting from terrorist incidents and the threat of terrorist incidents;
interest rate fluctuations and financial market conditions and the results of financing efforts, including the Company’s credit ratings;
the ability of the Company to obtain additional generating capacity at competitive prices;
catastrophic events such as fires, earthquakes, explosions, floods, hurricanes, droughts, pandemic health events such as an avian influenza,influenzas, or other similar occurrences;
the direct or indirect effects on the Company’s business resulting from incidents similar toaffecting the August 2003 power outage in the Northeast;U.S. electric grid or operation of generation resources;
the effect of accounting pronouncements issued periodically by standard setting bodies; and
other factors discussed elsewhere herein and in other reports (including the Form 10-K) filed by the Company from time to time with the SEC.
The Company expressly disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

II-327II-338


STATEMENTS OF INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
            
              
 2009 2008 2007 
 2008 2007 2006 
 (in thousands)  (in thousands)
  
Operating Revenues:
  
Retail revenues $785,434 $727,214 $647,186  $790,950 $785,434 $727,214 
Wholesale revenues — 
Non-affiliates 353,793 323,120 268,850 
Affiliates 100,928 46,169 76,439 
Wholesale revenues, non-affiliates 299,268 353,793 323,120 
Wholesale revenues, affiliates 44,546 100,928 46,169 
Other revenues 16,387 17,241 16,762  14,657 16,387 17,241 
Total operating revenues 1,256,542 1,113,744 1,009,237  1,149,421 1,256,542 1,113,744 
Operating Expenses:
  
Fuel 586,503 494,248 438,622  519,687 586,503 494,248 
Purchased power — 
Non-affiliates 27,036 9,188 16,292 
Affiliates 99,526 86,690 56,955 
Purchased power, non-affiliates 8,831 27,036 9,188 
Purchased power, affiliates 83,104 99,526 86,690 
Other operations and maintenance 260,011 255,177 236,692  246,758 260,011 255,177 
Depreciation and amortization 71,039 60,376 46,853  70,916 71,039 60,376 
Taxes other than income taxes 65,099 60,328 60,904  64,068 65,099 60,328 
Total operating expenses 1,109,214 966,007 856,318  993,364 1,109,214 966,007 
Operating Income
 147,328 147,737 152,919  156,057 147,328 147,737 
Other Income and (Expense):
  
Interest income 1,998 1,986 4,272  804 1,998 1,986 
Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized  (17,978)  (18,158)  (18,639)  (22,940)  (17,979)  (18,158)
Other income (expense), net 4,694 6,029  (6,712) 2,993 4,695 6,029 
Total other income and (expense)  (11,286)  (10,143)  (21,079)  (19,143)  (11,286)  (10,143)
Earnings Before Income Taxes
 136,042 137,594 131,840  136,914 136,042 137,594 
Income taxes 48,349 51,830 48,097  50,214 48,349 51,830 
Net Income
 87,693 85,764 83,743  86,700 87,693 85,764 
Dividends on Preferred Stock
 1,733 1,733 1,733  1,733 1,733 1,733 
Net Income After Dividends on Preferred Stock
 $85,960 $84,031 $82,010  $84,967 $85,960 $84,031 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-328II-339


STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
            
              
 2009 2008 2007 
 2008 2007 2006 
 (in thousands)  (in thousands)
 
Operating Activities:
  
Net income $87,693 $85,764 $83,743  $86,700 $87,693 $85,764 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided from operating activities —  
Depreciation and amortization 75,765 69,971 68,198 
Deferred income taxes and investment tax credits, net 24,840  (36,572)  (47,535)
Depreciation and amortization, total 78,914 75,765 69,971 
Deferred income taxes  (39,849) 24,840  (36,572)
Plant Daniel capacity   (5,659)  (13,008)    (5,659)
Pension, postretirement, and other employee benefits 8,182 8,782 5,650  7,077 8,182 8,782 
Stock based compensation expense 724 1,038 1,057  886 724 1,038 
Tax benefit of stock options 489 287 258  34 489 287 
Generation construction screening costs  (30,638)  (26,662)  (9,031)
Hurricane Katrina grant proceeds-property reserve  60,000     60,000 
Wholesale generation construction screening expense  (9,284)   
Other, net  (38,145)  (24,814)  (5,761)  (3,650)  (20,767)  (15,784)
Changes in certain current assets and liabilities —  
Receivables  (24,432) 25,107 64,976 
Fossil fuel stock  (38,072)  (4,787) 7,765 
Materials and supplies 297 487 750 
Prepaid income taxes 3,243 17,727 20,247 
Other current assets  (2,022)  (1,923)  (6,560)
Hurricane Katrina grant proceeds  14,345 120,328 
Hurricane Katrina accounts payable   (53)  (50,512)
Other accounts payable 3,251  (4,525)  (30,419)
Accrued taxes 2,428  (867) 1,972 
Accrued compensation  (1,362)  (1,993)  (629)
Over recovered regulatory clause revenues    (26,188)
Other current liabilities 836 4,343 634 
-Receivables 9,677  (9,982) 14,874 
-Under recovered regulatory clause revenues 54,994  (14,450) 10,234 
-Fossil fuel stock  (41,699)  (38,072)  (4,787)
-Materials and supplies  (649) 297 487 
-Prepaid income taxes 1,061 3,243 17,726 
-Other current assets 2,065  (2,022)  (1,923)
-Hurricane Katrina grant proceeds   14,345 
-Hurricane Katrina accounts payable    (53)
-Other accounts payable  (7,590) 3,251  (4,525)
-Accrued taxes 8,800 2,428  (867)
-Accrued compensation  (6,819)  (1,362)  (1,993)
-Over recovered regulatory clause revenues 48,596   
-Other current liabilities 2,732 836 4,344 
Net cash provided from operating activities 94,431 206,658 194,966  170,642 94,431 206,658 
Investing Activities:
  
Property additions  (153,401)  (144,925)  (127,290)  (101,995)  (153,401)  (144,925)
Cost of removal net of salvage  (6,411) 2,195  (9,420)  (9,352)  (6,411) 2,195 
Construction payables  (4,084) 8,027  (7,596)  (5,091)  (4,084) 8,027 
Hurricane Katrina capital grant proceeds 7,314 34,953 152,752   7,314 34,953 
Other 819  (755)  (1,992)
Other investing activities  (2,971) 819  (755)
Net cash provided from (used for) investing activities  (155,763)  (100,505) 6,454 
Net cash used for investing activities  (119,409)  (155,763)  (100,505)
Financing Activities:
  
Increase (decrease) in notes payable, net 16,350  (41,433)  (150,746)  (26,293) 16,350  (41,433)
Proceeds —  
Senior notes 50,000 35,000  
Capital contributions from parent company 4,567 3,541 5,436 
Gross excess tax benefit of stock options 934 572 669  117 934 572 
Capital contributions from parent company 3,541 5,436 5,503 
Pollution control revenue bonds 7,900     7,900  
Other long-term debt 80,000   
Senior notes issuances 125,000 50,000 35,000 
Other long-term debt issuances  80,000  
Redemptions —  
Pollution control revenue bonds  (7,900)      (7,900)  
Senior notes  (40,000)   
Other long-term debt   (36,082)      (36,082)
Payment of preferred stock dividends  (1,733)  (1,733)  (1,733)  (1,733)  (1,733)  (1,733)
Payment of common stock dividends  (68,400)  (67,300)  (65,200)  (68,500)  (68,400)  (67,300)
Other  (1,774)   
Other financing activities  (1,779)  (1,774)  
Net cash provided from (used for) financing activities 78,918  (105,540)  (211,507)  (8,621) 78,918  (105,540)
Net Change in Cash and Cash Equivalents
 17,586 613  (10,087) 42,612 17,586 613 
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Year
 4,827 4,214 14,301  22,413 4,827 4,214 
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Year
 $22,413 $4,827 $4,214  $65,025 $22,413 $4,827 
Supplemental Cash Flow Information:
  
Cash paid during the period for —  
Interest (net of $229, $12 and $- capitalized, respectively) $15,753 $16,164 $29,288 
Interest (net of $117, $229 and $12 capitalized, respectively) $19,832 $15,753 $16,164 
Income taxes (net of refunds) 23,829 67,453 75,209  77,206 23,829 67,453 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-329II-340


BALANCE SHEETS
At December 31, 20082009 and 20072008
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                
 
Assets 2008 2007  2009 2008 
 (in thousands)  (in thousands)
  
Current Assets:
  
Cash and cash equivalents $22,413 $4,827  $65,025 $22,413 
Receivables —  
Customer accounts receivable 40,262 43,946  36,766 40,262 
Unbilled revenues 24,798 23,163  27,168 24,798 
Under recovered regulatory clause revenues 54,994 40,545   54,994 
Other accounts and notes receivable 8,995 5,895  11,337 8,995 
Affiliated companies 24,108 11,838  13,215 24,108 
Accumulated provision for uncollectible accounts  (1,039)  (924)  (940)  (1,039)
Fossil fuel stock, at average cost 85,538 47,466  127,237 85,538 
Materials and supplies, at average cost 27,143 27,440  27,793 27,143 
Other regulatory assets, current 53,273 59,220 
Prepaid income taxes 1,061 5,735  32,237 1,061 
Other regulatory assets 59,219 32,234 
Other 9,838 12,687 
Other current assets 12,625 9,837 
Total current assets 357,330 254,852  405,736 357,330 
Property, Plant, and Equipment:
  
In service 2,234,573 2,130,835  2,316,494 2,234,573 
Less accumulated provision for depreciation 923,269 880,148  950,373 923,269 
 1,311,304 1,250,687 
Plant in service, net of depreciation 1,366,121 1,311,304 
Construction work in progress 70,665 50,015  48,219 70,665 
Total property, plant, and equipment 1,381,969 1,300,702  1,414,340 1,381,969 
Other Property and Investments
 8,280 9,556  7,018 8,280 
Deferred Charges and Other Assets:
  
Deferred charges related to income taxes 9,566 8,867  8,536 9,566 
Prepaid pension costs  66,099 
Other regulatory assets 171,680 62,746 
Other 23,870 24,843 
Other regulatory assets, deferred 209,100 171,680 
Other deferred charges and assets 27,951 23,870 
Total deferred charges and other assets 205,116 162,555  245,587 205,116 
Total Assets
 $1,952,695 1,727,665  $2,072,681 $1,952,695 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-330II-341


BALANCE SHEETS
At December 31, 20082009 and 20072008
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                
 
Liabilities and Stockholder’s Equity 2008 2007  2009 2008 
 (in thousands) 
  (in thousands)

Current Liabilities:
  
Securities due within one year $41,230 $1,138  $1,330 $41,230 
Notes payable 26,293 9,944   26,293 
Accounts payable —  
Affiliated 36,847 40,394  49,209 36,847 
Other 63,704 60,758  38,662 63,704 
Customer deposits 10,354 9,640  11,143 10,354 
Accrued taxes —  
Income taxes 8,842  
Other 50,701 48,853 
Accrued income taxes 10,590 8,842 
Other accrued taxes 49,547 50,700 
Accrued interest 3,930 2,713  5,739 3,930 
Accrued compensation 20,604 21,965  13,785 20,604 
Other regulatory liabilities 9,718 11,082 
Other regulatory liabilities, current 7,610 9,718 
Over recovered regulatory clause liabilities 48,596  
Liabilities from risk management activities 29,291 3,754  19,454 29,291 
Other 19,143 20,128 
Other current liabilities 21,142 19,144 
Total current liabilities 320,657 230,369  276,807 320,657 
Long-term Debt(See accompanying statements)
 370,460 281,963 
Long-Term Debt(See accompanying statements)
 493,480 370,460 
Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities:
  
Accumulated deferred income taxes 222,324 206,818  223,066 222,324 
Deferred credits related to income taxes 14,074 15,156  13,937 14,074 
Accumulated deferred investment tax credits 14,014 15,254  12,825 14,014 
Employee benefit obligations 142,188 88,300  161,778 142,188 
Other cost of removal obligations 96,191 90,485  97,820 96,191 
Other regulatory liabilities 51,340 119,458 
Other 52,216 33,252 
Other regulatory liabilities, deferred 54,576 51,340 
Other deferred credits and liabilities 47,090 52,216 
Total deferred credits and other liabilities 592,347 568,723  611,092 592,347 
Total Liabilities
 1,283,464 1,081,055  1,381,379 1,283,464 
Preferred Stock(See accompanying statements)
 32,780 32,780 
Redeemable Preferred Stock(See accompanying statements)
 32,780 32,780 
Common Stockholder’s Equity(See accompanying statements)
 636,451 613,830  658,522 636,451 
Total Liabilities and Stockholder’s Equity
 $1,952,695 $1,727,665  $2,072,681 $1,952,695 
Commitments and Contingent Matters(See notes)
  
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-331II-342


STATEMENTS OF CAPITALIZATION
At December 31, 20082009 and 20072008
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                
                  
 2009 2008 2009 2008 
 2008 2007 2008 2007 
 (in thousands) (percent of total)  (in thousands)
 (percent of total)
  
Long-Term Debt:
  
Long-term notes payable —  
6.00% due 2013 $50,000 $  50,000 50,000 
5.4% to 5.625% due 2017-2035 155,000 155,000  280,000 155,000 
Adjustable rates (1.645% to 2.36% at 1/1/09) due 2009-2011 120,000 40,000 
Adjustable rates (0.68% at 1/1/10) due 2011 80,000 120,000 
Total long-term notes payable 325,000 195,000  410,000 325,000 
Other long-term debt —  
Pollution control revenue bonds:  
5.15% due 2028 42,625   42,625 42,625 
Variable rates (1.20% to 1.60% at 1/1/09) due 2020-2028 40,070 82,695 
Variable rates (0.25% to 0.30% at 1/1/10) due 2020-2028 40,070 40,070 
Total other long-term debt 82,695 82,695  82,695 82,695 
Capitalized lease obligations 4,629 5,768  3,399 4,630 
Unamortized debt discount  (634)  (362)   (1,284)  (635) 
Total long-term debt (annual interest requirement — $17.0 million) 411,690 283,101 
Total long-term debt (annual interest requirement — $21.6 million) 494,810 411,690 
Less amount due within one year 41,230 1,138  1,330 41,230 
Long-term debt excluding amount due within one year 370,460 281,963  35.6%  30.4% 493,480 370,460  41.6%  35.6%
Cumulative Preferred Stock:
 
Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock:
 
$100 par value  
Authorized: 1,244,139 shares  
Outstanding: 334,210 shares  
4.40% to 5.25% (annual dividend requirement — $1.7 million) 32,780 32,780 3.2 3.5  32,780 32,780 2.8 3.2 
Common Stockholder’s Equity:
  
Common stock, without par value —  
Authorized: 1,130,000 shares  
Outstanding: 1,121,000 shares 37,691 37,691  37,691 37,691 
Paid-in capital 319,958 314,324  325,562 319,958 
Retained earnings 278,802 261,242  295,269 278,802 
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)  573    
Total common stockholder’s equity 636,451 613,830 61.2 66.1  658,522 636,451 55.6 61.2 
Total Capitalization
 $1,039,691 $928,573  100.0%  100.0% $1,184,782 $1,039,691  100.0%  100.0%
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-332II-343


STATEMENTS OF COMMON STOCKHOLDER’S EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                                            
 Accumulated   Number of Accumulated  
 Common Paid-In Retained Other Comprehensive   Common Other  
 Stock Capital Earnings Income (Loss) Total Shares Common Paid-In Retained Comprehensive  
 (in thousands) Issued Stock Capital Earnings Income (Loss) Total
 
Balance at December 31, 2005
 $37,691 $299,536 $227,701 $(3,768) $561,160 
Net income after dividends on preferred stock   82,010  82,010 
Capital contributions from parent company  7,483   7,483 
Other comprehensive income (loss)     (180)  (180)
Adjustment to initially apply FASB Statement No. 158, net of tax    4,547 4,547 
Cash dividends on common stock    (65,200)   (65,200)
 (in thousands)
 
Balance at December 31, 2006
 37,691 307,019 244,511 599 589,820  1,121 $37,691 $307,019 $244,511 $599 $589,820 
Net income after dividends on preferred stock   84,031  84,031     84,031  84,031 
Capital contributions from parent company  7,333   7,333    7,333   7,333 
Other comprehensive income (loss)     (26)  (26)      (26)  (26)
Cash dividends on common stock    (67,300)   (67,300)     (67,300)   (67,300)
Other   (28)    (28)    (28)    (28)
Balance at December 31, 2007
 37,691 314,324 261,242 573 613,830  1,121 37,691 314,324 261,242 573 613,830 
Net income after dividends on preferred stock   85,960  85,960     85,960  85,960 
Capital contributions from parent company  5,634   5,634    5,634   5,634 
Other comprehensive income (loss)     (573)  (573)      (573)  (573)
Cash dividends on common stock    (68,400)   (68,400)     (68,400)   (68,400)
Other      
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $37,691 $319,958 $278,802 $ $636,451  1,121 37,691 319,958 278,802  636,451 
Net income after dividends on preferred stock    84,967  84,967 
Capital contributions from parent company   5,604   5,604 
Other comprehensive income (loss)       
Cash dividends on common stock     (68,500)   (68,500)
Balance at December 31, 2009
 1,121 $37,691 $325,562 $295,269 $ $658,522 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-344


STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
            
              
 2009 2008 2007 
 2008 2007 2006 
 (in thousands)  (in thousands)
Net income after dividends on preferred stock
 $85,960 $84,031 $82,010  $84,967 $85,960 $84,031 
Other comprehensive income (loss):  
Qualifying hedges:  
Changes in fair value, net of tax of $(355), $(16), and $502, respectively  (573)  (26) 810 
Pension and other postretirement benefit plans: 
Change in additional minimum pension liability, net of tax of $-, $-, and $(614), respectively    (990)
Total other comprehensive income (loss)  (573)  (26)  (180)
Changes in fair value, net of tax of $-, $(355), and $(16), respectively   (573)  (26)
Comprehensive Income
 $85,387 $84,005 $81,830  $84,967 $85,387 $84,005 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-333II-345


NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
General
Mississippi Power Company (the Company) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Southern Company, which is the parent company of four traditional operating companies, Southern Power Company (Southern Power), Southern Company Services, Inc. (SCS), Southern Communications Services, Inc. (SouthernLINC Wireless), Southern Company Holdings, Inc. (Southern Holdings), Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (Southern Nuclear), and other direct and indirect subsidiaries. The traditional operating companies, Alabama Power Company (Alabama Power), Georgia Power Company (Georgia Power), Gulf Power Company (Gulf Power), and Mississippi Power Company (Mississippi Power), are vertically integrated utilities providing electric service in four Southeastern states. The Company operates as a vertically integrated utility providing service to retail customers in southeast Mississippi and to wholesale customers in the Southeast. Southern Power constructs, acquires, owns, and manages generation assets and sells electricity at market-based rates in the wholesale market. SCS, the system service company, provides, at cost, specialized services to Southern Company and its subsidiary companies. SouthernLINC Wireless provides digital wireless communications for use by Southern Company and its subsidiary companies and also markets these services to the public and provides fiber cable services within the Southeast. Southern Holdings is an intermediate holding company subsidiary for Southern Company’s investments in leveraged leases and various other energy-related businesses.leases. Southern Nuclear operates and provides services to Southern Company’s nuclear power plants.
The equity method is used for entities in which the Company has significant influence but does not control and for variable interest entities where the Company is not the primary beneficiary. Certain prior years’ data presented in the financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation.
The Company is subject to regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Mississippi Public Service Commission (PSC). The Company follows accounting principles generally accepted in the United States and complies with the accounting policies and practices prescribed by its regulatory commissions. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires the use of estimates, and the actual results may differ from those estimates.
Reclassifications
Certain prior years’ data presented in the financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation. The statements of income for the prior periods presented have been modified within the operating expenses section to combine the line items “Other operations” and “Maintenance” into a single line item entitled “Other operations and maintenance.” The balance sheet at December 31, 2007 was modified to present a separate line for “Liabilities for risk management activities” previously included in “Other.” These reclassifications had no effect on total assets, net income, or cash flows.
Affiliate Transactions
The Company has an agreement with SCS under which the following services are rendered to the Company at direct or allocated cost: general and design engineering, purchasing, accounting and statistical analysis, finance and treasury, tax, information resources, marketing, auditing, insurance and pension administration, human resources, systems and procedures, digital wireless communications, and other services with respect to business and operations and power pool transactions. Costs for these services amounted to $84 million, $87 million, and $71.8 million during 2009, 2008, and $55.2 million during 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Cost allocation methodologies used by SCS were approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission prior to the repeal of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, as amended, and management believes they are reasonable. The FERC permits services to be rendered at cost by system service companies.
The Company provides incidental services to and receives such services from other Southern Company subsidiaries which are generally minor in duration and amount. The Company provided no significant service to an affiliate in 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006.2007. The Company received storm restoration assistance from other Southern Company subsidiaries totaling $3.2 million and $1.5 million in 2008 and 2006, respectively.2008. There was no storm assistance received in 2009 or 2007.
The Company has an agreement with Alabama Power under which the Company owns a portion of Greene County Steam Plant. Alabama Power operates Greene County Steam Plant, and the Company reimburses Alabama Power for its proportionate share of all associated expenditures and costs. The Company reimbursed Alabama Power for the Company’s proportionate share of related expenses which totaled $10.2 million, $11.1 million, and $9.8 million in 2009, 2008, and $8.6 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. The Company also has

II-334


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
an agreement with Gulf Power under which Gulf Power owns a portion of Plant Daniel. The Company operates Plant Daniel, and Gulf Power reimburses the Company for its proportionate share of all associated expenditures and costs. Gulf Power reimbursed the Company for Gulf Power’s proportionate share of related expenses which totaled $20.9 million, $22.8 million, and $23.1 million in 2009, 2008, and $19.7 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. See Note 4 for additional information.

II-346


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The traditional operating companies, including the Company, and Southern Power may jointly enter into various types of wholesale energy, natural gas, and certain other contracts, either directly or through SCS, as agent. Each participating company may be jointly and severally liable for the obligations incurred under these agreements. See Note 7 under “Fuel Commitments” for additional information.
Regulatory Assets and Liabilities
The Company is subject to the provisions of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Statement No. 71, “Accountingin accounting for the Effectseffects of Certain Types of Regulation” (SFAS No. 71).rate regulation. Regulatory assets represent probable future revenues associated with certain costs that are expected to be recovered from customers through the ratemaking process. Regulatory liabilities represent probable future reductions in revenues associated with amounts that are expected to be credited to customers through the ratemaking process.
Regulatory assets and (liabilities) reflected in the balance sheets at December 31 relate to:
            
             2009 2008 Note
 2008 2007 Note
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
Hurricane Katrina $(143) $(143)  (a) $(143) $(143)  (a)
Underfunded retiree benefit plans 87,094 28,331  (b) 99,690 87,094  (b,k)
Property damage  (54,241)  (63,804)  (c)  (57,814)  (54,241)  (m)
Deferred income tax charges 8,862 9,486  (d) 9,027 8,862  (d)
Property tax 16,333 15,043  (e) 17,170 16,333  (e)
Transmission & distribution deferral 7,101 9,468  (f) 4,734 7,101  (f)
Vacation pay 8,498 7,736  (g) 8,756 8,498  (g,k)
Loss on reacquired debt 9,133 9,906  (h) 8,409 9,133  (h)
Loss on redeemed preferred stock 400 571  (i) 229 400  (i)
Loss on rail cars 196 274  (h) 108 196  (h)
Other regulatory assets  832  (c) 1,087   (c)
Fuel-hedging (realized and unrealized) losses 56,516 3,298  (j) 44,116 56,516  (j,k)
Asset retirement obligations 8,345 7,705  (d) 8,955 8,345  (d)
Deferred income tax credits  (14,962)  (17,654)  (d)  (14,853)  (14,962)  (d)
Other cost of removal obligations  (96,191)  (90,485)  (d)  (97,820)  (96,191)  (d)
Fuel-hedging (realized and unrealized) gains  (761)  (4,102)  (j)  (551)  (761)  (j,k)
Generation screening costs 37,857 11,196  (c) 68,496 37,857  (l)
Other liabilities  (4,894)  (6,596)  (c)  (2,628)  (4,894)  (c)
Overfunded retiree benefit plans   (53,396)  (b)
Total assets (liabilities), net $69,143 $(132,334)  $96,968 $69,143 
Note:  The recovery and amortization periods for these regulatory assets and (liabilities) are as follows:
Note:The recovery and amortization periods for these regulatory assets and (liabilities) are as follows:
(a) For additional information, see Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Storm Damage Cost Recovery.”
 
(b) Recovered and amortized over the average remaining service period which may range up to 14 years. See Note 2 for additional information.
 
(c) Recorded and recovered as approved by the Mississippi PSC.PSC over periods not exceeding two years.
 
(d) Asset retirement and removal liabilities are recorded, deferred income tax assets are recovered and deferred tax liabilities are amortized over the related property lives, which may range up to 50 years. Asset retirement and removal liabilities will be settled and trued up following completion of the related activities.
 
(e) Recovered through the ad valorem tax adjustment clause over a 12-month period beginning in April of the following year.
 
(f) Amortized over a four-year period ending 2011.
 
(g) Recorded as earned by employees and recovered as paid, generally within one year.
 
(h) Recovered over the remaining life of the original issue/lease or, if refinanced, over the life of the new issue/lease, which may range up to 50 years.
 
(i) Amortized over a period beginning in 2004 that is not to exceed seven years.
 
(j) Fuel-hedging assets and liabilities are recorded over the life of the underlying hedged purchase contracts, which generally do not exceed two years. Upon final settlement, costs are recovered through the Energy Cost Management clause (ECM).
(k)Not earning a return as offset by a corresponding asset or liability.
(l)Recovery expected to be determined by the Mississippi PSC by May 1, 2010. For additional information, see Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle.”
(m)For additional information, see Note 1 under “Provision for Property Damage” and Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters — System Restoration Rider.”

II-335II-347


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
In the event that a portion of the Company’s operations is no longer subject to the provisions of SFAS No. 71,applicable accounting rules for rate regulation, the Company would be required to write off or reclassify to accumulated other comprehensive income related regulatory assets and liabilities that are not specifically recoverable through regulated rates. In addition, the Company would be required to determine if any impairment to other assets, including plant, exists and write down the assets, if impaired, to their fair values. All regulatory assets and liabilities are to be reflected in rates.
Government Grants
The Company received a grant in October 2006 from the Mississippi Development Authority (MDA) for $276.4 million, primarily for storm damage cost recovery. On June 1,In 2007, the Company received a grant payment$109.3 million of $85.2 million from the State of Mississippi related to storm restoration costs incurred andbond proceeds under the state bond program of which $25.2 million was for retail storm restoration cost, $60.0 million was to increase the Company’s retail property damage reserve. In the fourth quarter 2007, the Company received additional grant payments totalingreserve, and $24.1 million for expenditures incurredwas to date forcover the retail portion of construction of a new storm operations center. On May 23,In 2008, the Company received grant payments in the amount of $7.3 million and anticipates the receipt of approximately $3.2 million in 2009.2010. The grant proceeds do not represent a future obligation of the Company. The portion of any grants received related to retail storm recovery was applied to the retail regulatory asset that was established as restoration costs were incurred. The portion related to wholesale storm recovery was recorded either as a reduction to operations and maintenance expense or as a reduction to total property, plant, and equipment depending on the restoration work performed and the appropriate allocations of cost of service.
Revenues
Energy and other revenues are recognized as services are rendered.provided. Wholesale capacity revenues from long-term contracts are recognized at the lesser of the levelized amount or the amount billable under the contract over the respective contract period. Unbilled revenues related to retail sales are accrued at the end of each fiscal period. The Company’s retail and wholesale rates include provisions to adjust billings for fluctuations in fuel costs, fuel hedging, the energy component of purchased power costs, and certain other costs. Retail rates also include provisions to adjust billings for fluctuations in costs for ad valorem taxes and certain qualifying environmental costs. Revenues are adjusted for differences between these actual costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Under or over recovered regulatory clause revenues are recorded in the balance sheets and are recovered or returned to customers through adjustments to the billing factors. The Company is required to file with the Mississippi PSC for an adjustment to the fuel cost recovery factor annually.
The Company has a diversified base of customers. For years ended December 31, 2008,2009 and December 31, 2007,2008, no single customer or industry comprises 10% or more of revenues. For all periods presented, uncollectible accounts averaged less than 1% of revenues.
Fuel Costs
Fuel costs are expensed as the fuel is used. Fuel expense generally includes the cost of purchased emissionemissions allowances as they are used. Fuel costs also includedinclude gains and/or losses from fuel hedging programs as approved by the Mississippi PSC.
Income and Other Taxes
The Company uses the liability method of accounting for deferred income taxes and provides deferred income taxes for all significant income tax temporary differences. Investment tax credits utilized are deferred and amortized to income over the average life of the related property. Taxes that are collected from customers on behalf of governmental agencies to be remitted to these agencies are presented net on the statements of income.
In accordance with FASB Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertaintyaccounting standards related to the uncertainty in Income Taxes” (FIN 48),income taxes, the Company recognizes tax positions that are “more likely than not” of being sustained upon examination by the appropriate taxing authorities. See Note 5 under “Unrecognized Tax Benefits” for additional information.
Property, Plant, and Equipment
Property, plant, and equipment is stated at original cost less regulatory disallowances and impairments. Original cost includes: materials; labor; minor items of property; appropriate administrative and general costs; payroll-related costs such as taxes, pensions, and other benefits; and the interest capitalized and/or cost of funds used during construction for projects over $10 million.

II-336II-348


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
The Company’s property, plant, and equipment consisted of the following at December 31:
        
         2009 2008
 2008 2007
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
Generation $919,149 $874,585  $963,145 $919,149 
Transmission 436,280 420,392  449,452 436,280 
Distribution 720,124 688,715  748,066 720,124 
General 159,020 147,143  155,831 159,020 
Total plant in service $2,234,573 $2,130,835  $2,316,494 $2,234,573 
The cost of replacements of property, exclusive of minor items of property, is capitalized. The cost of maintenance, repairs, and replacement of minor items of property is charged to maintenance expense except for the cost of maintenance of coal cars and a portion of the railway track maintenance costs, which are charged to fuel stock and recovered through the Company’s fuel clause.
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation of the original cost of plant in service is provided primarily by using composite straight-line rates, which approximated 3.3%, in 2009, 2008, and 2007, and 3.2% in 2006.2007. Depreciation studies are conducted periodically to update the composite rates. In March 2006, the Mississippi PSC approved the study filed by the Company in 2005, with new rates effective January 1, 2006. The new depreciation rates did not result in a material change to annual depreciation expense. When property subject to depreciation is retired or otherwise disposed of in the normal course of business, its cost, together with the cost of removal, less salvage, is charged to the accumulated depreciation provision. Minor items of property included in the original cost of the plant are retired when the related property unit is retired. Depreciation expense includes an amount for the expected cost of removal of facilities. On September 8, 2009 and September 9, 2009, the Company filed with the Mississippi PSC and the FERC, respectively, a depreciation study as of December 31, 2008. The FERC accepted this study on October 20, 2009.
In April 2007, the Mississippi PSC issued an order allowing the Company to defer certain reliability related maintenance costs beginning January 1, 2007 and recover them evenly over a four-year period beginning January 1, 2008. These costs related to maintenance that was needed as follow-up to emergency repairs that were made subsequent to Hurricane Katrina. At December 31, 2007, the Company had incurred and deferred the retail portion of $9.5 million of such costs. At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had a balance of the deferred retail portion of $7.1$4.7 million with $2.4$2.3 million included in current assets as other regulatory assets and $4.7$2.4 million included in long-term other regulatory assets.
In January 2006, the Mississippi PSC issued an accounting order directing the Company to exclude from its calculation of depreciation expense approximately $1.2 million related to capitalized Hurricane Katrina costs since these costs were recovered separately.assets, deferred.
In December 2003, the Mississippi PSC issued an interim accounting order directing the Company to expense and record a regulatory liability of $60.3 million while it considered the Company’s request to include 266 megawatts (MWs) of Plant Daniel Units 3 and 4 generating capacity in jurisdictional cost of service. In May 2004, the Mississippi PSC approved the Company’s request effective January 1, 2004, and ordered the Company to amortize the regulatory liability previously established to reduce depreciation and amortization expenses over a four yearfour-year period. The amountsamount amortized were $5.7 million and $13.0 million in 2007 and 2006, respectively.was $5.7 million. The regulatory liability was fully amortized as of December 31, 2007.
Asset Retirement Obligations and Other Costs of Removal
Asset retirement obligations are computed as the present value of the ultimate costs for an asset’s future retirement and are recorded in the period in which the liability is incurred. The costs are capitalized as part of the related long-lived asset and depreciated over the asset’s useful life. The Company has received accounting guidance from the Mississippi PSC allowing the continued accrual of other future retirement costs for long-lived assets that the Company does not have a legal obligation to retire. Accordingly, the accumulated removal costs for these obligations will continue to beare reflected in the balance sheets as a regulatory liability.
The Company has retirement obligations related to various landfill sites, underground storage tanks, and asbestos removal. In connection with the adoption of FASB Interpretation No. 47, “Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations” (FIN 47) the Company also recorded additional asset retirement obligations (and assets) of $9.5 million, primarily related to asbestos. The Company also has identified retirement obligations related to certain transmission and distribution facilities, co-generation facilities, certain wireless communication towers, and certain structures authorized by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. However, liabilities for the removal of these assets have not been recorded because the range of time over which the Company may settle these

II-337


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
obligations is unknown and cannot be reasonably estimated. The Company will continue to recognize in the statements of income allowed removal costs in accordance with its regulatory treatment. Any differences between costs recognized under FASB Statement No. 143, “Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations” (SFAS No. 143) and FIN 47 and those reflected in rates are recognized as either a regulatory asset or liability, as ordered by the Mississippi PSC, and are reflected in the balance sheets.

II-349


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Details of the asset retirement obligations included in the balance sheets are as follows:
        
             2009 2008
 2008 2007 2006 
 (in millions)  (in thousands)
Balance, beginning of year $17.3 $15.8 $15.4  $17,977 $17,290 
Liabilities incurred  0.6   378  
Liabilities settled  (0.1)   (0.1)  (1,892)  (55)
Accretion 1.0 0.9 0.8  1,049 967 
Cash flow revisions  (0.2)   (0.3)  (81)  (225)
Balance, end of year $18.0 $17.3 $15.8  $17,431 $17,977 
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets and Intangibles
The Company evaluates long-lived assets for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of such assets may not be recoverable. The determination of whether an impairment has occurred is based on either a specific regulatory disallowance or an estimate of undiscounted future cash flows attributable to the assets, as compared with the carrying value of the assets. If an impairment has occurred, the amount of the impairment recognized is determined by either the amount of regulatory disallowance or by estimating the fair value of the asset and recording a loss for the amount if the carrying value is greater than the fair value. For assets identified as held for sale, the carrying value is compared to the estimated fair value less the cost to sell in order to determine if an impairment loss is required. Until the assets are disposed of, their estimated fair value is re-evaluated when circumstances or events change.
Provision for Property Damage
The Company carries insurance for the cost of certain types of damage to generation plants and general property. However, the Company is self-insured for the cost of storm, fire, and other uninsured casualty damage to its property, including transmission and distribution facilities. As permitted by the Mississippi PSC and the FERC, the Company accrues for the cost of such damage through an annual expense accrual credited to a regulatory liability account.accounts for the retail and wholesale jurisdictions. The cost of repairing actual damage resulting from such events that individually exceed $50,000 is charged to the reserve. A 1999 Mississippi PSC order allowed the Company to accrue $1.5 million to $4.6 million to the reserve annually, with a maximum reserve totaling $23 million. In October 2006, in conjunction with the Mississippi PSC Hurricane Katrina-related financing order, the Mississippi PSC ordered the Company to cease all accruals to the retail property damage reserve until a new reserve cap is established. However, in the same financing order, the Mississippi PSC approved the replenishment of the retail property damage reserve with $60 million to be funded with a portion of the proceeds of bonds to be issued by the Mississippi Development Bank on behalf of the State of Mississippi and reported as liabilities by the State of Mississippi. The Company received the $60 million bond proceeds in June 2007. The Company accrued $0.2 million annually in 2008, 2007, and 2006 for the wholesale jurisdiction. The Company made no discretionary retail accruals in 2008 and 2007 as a result of the order. In 2006, the Company accrued $1.0 million for the retail jurisdiction. On January 9, 2009, the Mississippi PSC approved the System Restoration Rider (SRR) stipulation between the Company and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff. In accordance with the stipulation, every three years the Mississippi PSC, Mississippi Public Utilities Staff, and the Company will agree on SRR revenue level(s) for the ensuing period, based on historical data, expected exposure, type and amount of insurance coverage, excluding insurance cost, and any other relevant information. The accrual amount and the reserve balance are determined based on the SRR revenue level(s). If a significant change in circumstances occurs, then the SRR revenue level can be adjusted more frequently if the Company and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff or the Mississippi PSC deem the change appropriate. Each year the Company will set rates to collect the approved SRR revenues. The property damage reserve accrual will be the difference between the approved SRR revenues and the SRR revenue requirement, excluding any accruedaccrual to the reserve. In 2009, the Company made retail accruals of $3.7 million per the SRR order. In addition, SRR allows the Company to set up a regulatory asset, pending review, if the allowable actual retail property damage costs exceed the amount in the retail property damage reserve. See Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Storm Damage Cost Recovery” and “Retail Regulatory Matters — System Restoration Rider” for additional information regarding the depletion of these reserves following Hurricane Katrina and the deferral of additional costs, as well as additional rate riders or other cost recovery mechanisms which have and/or may be approved by the Mississippi PSC to recover the deferred costs and accrue reserves. The Company accrued $0.3 million in 2009 and $0.2 million annually in 2008 and 2007 for the wholesale jurisdiction. See Note 3 under “FERC Matters — Wholesale Rate Filing” for additional information.

II-338II-350


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Cash and Cash Equivalents
For purposes of the financial statements, temporary cash investments are considered cash equivalents. Temporary cash investments are securities with original maturities of 90 days or less.
Materials and Supplies
Generally, materials and supplies include the average cost of transmission, distribution, and generating plant materials. Materials are charged to inventory when purchased and then expensed or capitalized to plant, as appropriate, at weighted average cost when installed.
Fuel Inventory
Fuel inventory includes the average costs of oil, coal, natural gas, and emissionemissions allowances. Fuel is charged to inventory when purchased and then expensed as used and recovered by the Company through fuel cost recovery rates approved by the Mississippi PSC. EmissionEmissions allowances granted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are included in inventory at zero cost.
Financial Instruments
The Company uses derivative financial instruments to limit exposure to fluctuations in the prices of certain fuel purchases and electricity purchases and sales. All derivative financial instruments are recognized as either assets or liabilities (categorized(included in “Other” or shown separately as “Risk Management Activities”) and are measured at fair value. See Note 9 for additional information. Substantially all of the Company’s bulk energy purchases and sales contracts that meet the definition of a derivative are exempt from fair value accounting requirements and are accounted for under the accrual method. Other derivative contracts qualify as cash flow hedges of anticipated transactions or are recoverable through the Mississippi PSC approved fuel hedging program as discussed below. This results in the deferral of related gains and losses in other comprehensive income or regulatory assets and liabilities, respectively, as appropriate until the hedged transactions occur. Any ineffectiveness arising from cash flow hedges is recognized currently in net income. Other derivative contracts are marked to market through current period income and are recorded on a net basis in the statements of income. See Note 6 under “Financial Instruments”10 for additional information.
The Company does not offset fair value amounts recognized for multiple derivative instruments executed with the same counterparty under a master netting arrangement. Additionally, the Company has no outstanding collateral repayment obligations or rights to reclaim collateral arising from derivative instruments recognized at December 31, 2008.2009.
The Mississippi PSC has approved the Company’s request to implement an Energy Cost Management clause (ECM)ECM which, among other things, allows the Company to utilize financial instruments to hedge its fuel commitments. Changes in the fair value of these financial instruments are recorded as regulatory assets or liabilities. Amounts paid or received as a result of financial settlement of these instruments are classified as fuel expense and are included in the ECM factor applied to customer billings. The Company’s jurisdictional wholesale customers have a similar ECM mechanism, which has been approved by the FERC.
The Company is exposed to losses related to financial instruments in the event of counterparties’ nonperformance. The Company has established controls to determine and monitor the creditworthiness of counterparties in order to mitigate the Company’s exposure to counterparty credit risk.

II-339


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Other financial instruments for which the carrying amounts did not equal the fair values at December 31 were as follows:
         
  Carrying Amount Fair Value
  (in thousands)
Long-term debt:        
2008
 $407,061  $405,957 
2007  277,333   270,897 
The fair values were based on either closing market prices (Level 1) or closing prices of comparable instruments (Level 2). See Note 9 for all other items recognized at fair value in the financial statements.
Comprehensive Income
The objective of comprehensive income is to report a measure of all changes in common stock equity of an enterprise that result from transactions and other economic events of the period other than transactions with owners. Comprehensive income consists of net income, changes in the fair value of qualifying cash flow hedges, and prior to the adoption of SFAS No.158, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans” (SFAS No. 158) the minimum pension liability, less income taxes and reclassifications for amounts included in net income.

II-351


Variable Interest Entities
The primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity must consolidate the related assets and liabilities. TheNOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company has established a wholly-owned trust to issue preferred securities. See Note 6 under “Long-Term Debt Payable to Affiliated Trust” for additional information. However, the Company is not considered the primary beneficiary of the trust. Therefore, the investments in this trust are reflected as Other Investments and the related loan from the trust is included in Long-term Debt in the balance sheets. During 2007 the Company redeemed its last remaining series of preferred securities, which totaled $36 million.2009 Annual Report
2. RETIREMENT BENEFITS
The Company has a defined benefit, trusteed, pension plan covering substantially all employees. The plan is funded in accordance with requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (ERISA). No contributions to the plan are expected for the year ending December 31, 2009.2010. The Company also provides certain defined benefit pension plans for a selected group of management and highly compensated employees. Benefits under these non-qualified pension plans are funded on a cash basis. In addition, the Company provides certain medical care and life insurance benefits for retired employees through other postretirement benefit plans. The Company funds trusts to the extent required by the FERC. For the year ending December 31, 2009,2010, postretirement trust contributions are expected to total approximately $0.1$0.2 million.
The measurement date for plan assets and obligations for 2009 and 2008 was December 31 while the measurement date for prior years was September 30. Pursuant to SFAS No. 158,accounting standards related to defined postretirement benefit plans, the Company was required to change the measurement date for its defined postretirement benefit postretirement plans from September 30 to December 31 beginning with the year ended December 31, 2008. As permitted, the Company adopted the measurement date provisions of SFAS No. 158 effective January 1, 2008, resulting in an increase in long-term liabilities of approximately $1.6 million and a decrease in prepaid pension costs of approximately $0.1 million.

II-340


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Pension Plans
The total accumulated benefit obligation for the pension plans was $289 million in 2009 and $252 million in 2008 and $240 million in 2007.2008. Changes during the plan year ended December 31, 2009 and the 15-month period ended December 31, 2008 and the 12-month period ended September 30, 2007 in the projected benefit obligations and the fair value of plan assets were as follows:
        
         2009 2008
 2008 2007
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
Change in benefit obligation
  
Benefit obligation at beginning of year $256,903 $250,543  $266,879 $256,903 
Service cost 8,557 6,934  6,792 8,557 
Interest cost 19,753 14,767  17,577 19,753 
Benefits paid  (14,721)  (11,529)  (11,965)  (14,721)
Actuarial gain and employee transfers  (3,613)  (6,001)
Amendments  2,189 
Actuarial loss (gain) 29,896  (3,613)
Balance at end of year 266,879 256,903  309,179 266,879 
Change in plan assets
  
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year 300,866 267,276  198,510 300,866 
Actual return (loss)on plan assets  (89,420) 43,849 
Actual return (loss) on plan assets 30,088  (89,420)
Employer contributions 1,785 1,270  1,382 1,785 
Benefits paid  (14,721)  (11,529)  (11,965)  (14,721)
Fair value of plan assets at end of year 198,510 300,866  218,015 198,510 
Funded status at end of year  (68,369) 43,963 
Fourth quarter contributions  423 
Accrued liability $(91,164) $(68,369)
(Accrued liability) prepaid pension asset, net $(68,369) $44,386 
At December 31, 2008,2009, the projected benefit obligations for the qualified and non-qualified pension plans were $244.9$285.9 million and $22.0$23.3 million, respectively. All pension plan assets are related to the qualified pension plan.
Pension plan assets are managed and invested in accordance with all applicable requirements, including ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Internal Revenue Code). In 2009, in determining the optimal asset allocation for the pension fund, the Company performed an extensive study based on projections of both assets and liabilities over a 10-year forward horizon. The primary goal of the study was to maximize plan funded status. The Company’s investment policy covers a diversified mix of assets, including equity and fixed income securities, real estate, and private equity. Derivative instruments are used primarily as hedging tools but may also be used to gain efficient exposure to the various asset classes.classes and as hedging tools. The Company primarily minimizes the risk of large losses primarily through diversification but also monitors and manages other aspects of risk.

II-352


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The actual composition of the Company’s pension plan assets as of the end of year,December 31, 2009 and 2008, along with the targeted mix of assets, is presented below:
                        
 Target 2008 2007  Target 2009 2008 
Domestic equity  36%  34%  38%  29%  33%  34%
International equity 24 23 24  28 29 23 
Fixed income 15 14 15  15 15 14 
Real estate 15 19 16 
Special situations 3   
Real estate investments 15 13 19 
Private equity 10 10 7  10 10 10 
Total  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%
The investment strategy for plan assets related to the Company’s defined benefit plan is to be broadly diversified across major asset classes. The asset allocation is established after consideration of various factors that affect the assets and liabilities of the pension plan including, but not limited to, historical and expected returns, volatility, correlations of asset classes, the current level of assets and liabilities, and the assumed growth in assets and liabilities. Because a significant portion of the liability of the pension plan is long-term in nature, the assets are invested consistent with long-term investment expectations for return and risk. To manage the actual asset class exposures relative to the target asset allocation, the Company employs a formal rebalancing program. As additional risk management, external investment managers and service providers are subject to written guidelines to ensure appropriate and prudent investment practices.
Detailed below is a description of the investment strategies for each major asset category disclosed above:
Domestic equity.This portion of the portfolio comprises a mix of large and small capitalization stocks with generally an equal distribution of value and growth attributes managed both actively and through passive index approaches.
International equity.This portion of the portfolio is actively managed with a blend of growth stocks and value stocks with both developed and emerging market exposure.
Fixed income.This portion of the portfolio is actively managed through an allocation to long-dated, investment grade corporate and government bonds.
Special situations.Though currently unfunded, this portion of the portfolio was established both to execute opportunistic investment strategies with the objectives of diversifying and enhancing returns and exploiting short-term inefficiencies, as well as to invest in promising new strategies of a longer-term nature.
Real estate investments.Assets in this portion of the portfolio are invested in traditional private market, equity-oriented investments in real properties (indirectly through pooled funds or partnerships) and in publicly traded real estate securities.
Private equity.This portion of the portfolio generally consists of investments in private partnerships that invest in private or public securities typically through privately negotiated and/or structured transactions. Leveraged buyouts, venture capital, and distressed debt are examples of investment strategies within this category.

II-341II-353


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
The fair values of pension plan assets as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 are presented below. These fair value measurements exclude cash, receivables related to investment income, pending investments sales, and payables related to pending investment purchases.
                     
  Fair Value Measurements Using      
  Quoted Prices          
  in Active Significant        
  Markets for Other Significant      
  Identical Observable Unobservable      
  Assets Inputs Inputs      
As of December 31, 2009: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total    
     
  (in thousands)
    
Assets:                    
Domestic equity* $43,279  $17,897  $  $61,176     
International equity*  55,948   5,575      61,523     
Fixed income:                    
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     16,118      16,118     
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     4,382      4,382     
Corporate bonds     10,803      10,803     
Pooled funds     390      390     
Cash equivalents and other  108   13,211      13,319     
Special situations                
Real estate investments  6,747      21,195   27,942     
Private equity        21,498   21,498     
 
Total $106,082  $68,376  $42,693  $217,151     
 
Liabilities:                    
Derivatives  (172)  (43)     (215)    
 
Total $105,910  $68,333  $42,693  $216,936     
 
*Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well-diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using  
  Quoted Prices      
  in Active Significant    
  Markets for Other Significant  
  Identical Observable Unobservable  
  Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2008: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
 
  (in thousands)
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $40,886  $16,650  $  $57,536 
International equity*  36,783   3,382      40,165 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     17,191      17,191 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     8,145      8,145 
Corporate bonds     11,147      11,147 
Pooled funds     120      120 
Cash equivalents and other  861   7,865      8,726 
Special situations            
Real estate investments  5,604      32,700   38,304 
Private equity        19,092   19,092 
 
Total $84,134  $64,500  $51,792  $200,426 
 
Liabilities:                
Derivatives  (301)        (301)
 
Total $83,833  $64,500  $51,792  $200,125 
 
*Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well-diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.

II-354


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Changes in the fair value measurement of the Level 3 items in the pension plan assets valued using significant unobservable inputs for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:
                 
  2009 2008
  Real Estate     Real Estate  
  Investments Private Equity Investments Private Equity
 
  (in thousands)
Beginning balance $32,700  $19,092  $40,755  $20,280 
Actual return on investments:                
Related to investments held at year end  (9,492)  1,322   (6,651)  (5,517)
Related to investments sold during the year  (2,516)  387   156   975 
 
Total return on investments  (12,008)  1,709   (6,495)  (4,542)
Purchases, sales, and settlements  503   697   (1,560)  3,354 
Transfers into/out of Level 3            
 
Ending balance $21,195  $21,498  $32,700  $19,092 
 
The fair values presented above are prepared in accordance with applicable accounting standards regarding fair value. For purposes of determining the fair value of the pension plan assets and the appropriate level designation, management relies on information provided by the plan’s trustee. This information is reviewed and evaluated by management with changes made to the trustee information as appropriate.
Securities for which the activity is observable on an active market or traded exchange are categorized as Level 1. Fixed income securities classified as Level 2 are valued using matrix pricing, a common model using observable inputs. Domestic and international equity securities classified as Level 2 consist of pooled funds where the value is not quoted on an exchange but where the value is determined using observable inputs from the market. Securities that are valued using unobservable inputs are classified as Level 3 and include investments in real estate and investments in limited partnerships. The Company invests (through the pension plan trustee) directly in the limited partnerships which then invest in various types of funds or various private entities within a fund. The fair value of the limited partnerships’ investments is based on audited annual capital accounts statements which are generally prepared on a fair value basis. The Company also relies on the fact that, in most instances, the underlying assets held by the limited partnerships are reported at fair value. External investment managers typically send valuations to both the custodian and to the Company within 90 days of quarter end. The custodian reports the most recent value available and adjusts the value for cash flows since the statement date for each respective fund.
Amounts recognized in the balance sheets related to the Company’s pension plansplan consist of:of the following:
         
  2008 2007
  (in thousands)
Prepaid pension costs $  $66,099 
Other regulatory assets  66,602   11,114 
Current liabilities, other  (1,498)  (1,393)
Other regulatory liabilities     (53,396)
Employee benefit obligations  (66,871)  (20,320)
         
  2009 2008
 
  (in thousands)
Other regulatory assets, deferred $85,357  $66,602 
Other current liabilities  (1,484)  (1,498)
Employee benefit obligations  (89,680)  (66,871)
 
Presented below are the amounts included in regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities at December 31, 20082009 and 20072008 related to the defined benefit pension plans that had not yet been recognized in net periodic pension cost along with the estimated amortization of such amounts for 2009.2010.
         
  Prior Service Cost Net(Gain)Loss
  (in thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2008:
        
Regulatory asset $10,800  $55,802 
Regulatory liabilities      
 
Total $10,800  $55,802 
 
 
Balance at December 31, 2007:
        
Regulatory asset $2,674  $8,440 
Regulatory liabilities  10,212   (63,608)
 
Total $12,886  $(55,168)
 
 
Estimated amortization in net periodic pension cost in 2009:
        
Regulatory asset $1,578  $539 
Regulatory liabilities      
 
Total $1,578  $539 
 
         
  Prior Service Cost Net (Gain) Loss
 
  (in thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2009:
        
Regulatory assets $9,222  $76,135 
         
Balance at December 31, 2008:
        
Regulatory assets $10,800  $55,802 
         
Estimated amortization in net periodic pension cost in 2010:
        
Regulatory assets $1,391  $634 

II-355


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The changes in the balances of regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities related to the defined benefit pension plans for the 15-month periodyear ended December 31, 20082009 and the 12-month period15 months ended September 30, 2007December 31, 2008 are presented in the following table:
         
  Regulatory Regulatory
  Assets Liabilities
  (in thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2006 $9,707  $(21,319)
Net (gain) loss  166   (30,800)
Change in prior service costs  2,189    
Reclassification adjustments:        
Amortization of prior service costs  (314)  (1,277)
Amortization of net gain  (634)   
 
Total reclassification adjustments  (948)  (1,277)
 
Total change  1,407   (32,077)
 
Balance at December 31, 2007 $11,114  $(53,396)
Net (gain) loss  56,721   54,849 
Change in prior service costs      
Reclassification adjustments:        
Amortization of prior service costs  (489)  (1,596)
Amortization of net gain  (744)  143 
 
Total reclassification adjustments  (1,233)  (1,453)
 
Total change  55,488   53,396 
 
Balance at December 31, 2008 $66,602  $ 
 

II-342


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
         
  Regulatory Regulatory
  Assets Liabilities
 
  (in thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2007
 $11,114  $(53,396)
Net loss (gain)  56,721   54,849 
Change in prior service costs/transition obligation      
Reclassification adjustments:        
Amortization of prior service costs  (489)  (1,596)
Amortization of net gain  (744)  143 
 
Total reclassification adjustments  (1,233)  (1,453)
 
Total change  55,488   53,396 
 
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $66,602  $ 
Net loss (gain)  20,872    
Change in prior service costs/transition obligation      
Reclassification adjustments:        
Amortization of prior service costs  (1,578)   
Amortization of net gain  (539)   
 
Total reclassification adjustments  (2,117)   
 
Total change  18,755    
 
Balance at December 31, 2009
 $85,357  $ 
 
Components of net periodic pension cost (income) were as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006  2009 2008 2007 
 (in thousands)  (in thousands) 
Service cost $6,846 $6,934 $7,207  $6,792 $6,846 $6,934 
Interest cost 15,802 14,767 13,727  17,577 15,802 14,767 
Expected return on plan assets  (20,611)  (19,099)  (18,107)  (21,065)  (20,611)  (19,099)
Recognized net (gain) loss 481 634 773 
Recognized net loss 539 481 634 
Net amortization 1,668 1,591 1,013  1,578 1,668 1,591 
Net periodic pension cost $4,186 $4,827 $4,613 
Net periodic pension cost (income) $5,421 $4,186 $4,827 
Net periodic pension cost (income) is the sum of service cost, interest cost, and other costs netted against the expected return on plan assets. The expected return on plan assets is determined by multiplying the expected rate of return on plan assets and the market-related value of plan assets. In determining the market-related value of plan assets, the Company has elected to amortize changes in the market value of all plan assets over five years rather than recognize the changes immediately. As a result, the accounting value of plan assets that is used to calculate the expected return on plan assets differs from the current fair value of the plan assets.
Future benefit payments reflect expected future service and are estimated based on assumptions used to measure the projected benefit obligation for the pension plans. At December 31, 2008,2009, estimated benefit payments were as follows:
        
 Benefit Benefit
 Payments Payments
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
2009 $12,947 
2010 13,332  $13,509 
2011 13,971  14,349 
2012 14,916  15,373 
2013 15,726  16,495 
2014 to 2018 95,981 
2014 18,078 
2015 to 2019 108,602 

II-356


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Other Postretirement Benefits
Changes during the plan year ended December 31, 2009 and the 15-month period ended December 31, 2008 and the year ended September 30, 2007 in the accumulated postretirement benefit obligations (APBO) and in the fair value of plan assets were as follows:
         
  2008  2007 
  (in thousands) 
Change in benefit obligation
        
Benefit obligation at beginning of year $84,495  $89,673 
Service cost  1,745   1,372 
Interest cost  6,498   5,254 
Benefits paid  (5,333)  (3,754)
Actuarial (gain) loss  (3,275)  (8,388)
Retiree drug subsidy  603   338 
 
Balance at end of year  84,733   84,495 
 
Change in plan assets
        
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year  25,593   23,689 
Actual return (loss) on plan assets  (5,653)  3,470 
Employer contributions  3,414   1,851 
Benefits paid  (4,731)  (3,417)
 
Fair value of plan assets at end of year  18,623   25,593 
 
Funded status at end of year  (66,110)  (58,902)
Fourth quarter contributions     906 
 
Accrued liability $(66,110) $(57,996)
 

II-343


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
         
  2009 2008
  (in thousands)
Change in benefit obligation
        
Benefit obligation at beginning of year $84,733  $84,495 
Service cost  1,328   1,745 
Interest cost  5,535   6,498 
Benefits paid  (4,041)  (5,333)
Actuarial gain  (1,550)  (3,275)
Plan amendments  (2,592)   
Retiree drug subsidy  361   603 
 
Balance at end of year  83,774   84,733 
 
Change in plan assets
        
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year  18,623   25,593 
Actual return (loss) on plan assets  2,902   (5,653)
Employer contributions  2,447   3,414 
Benefits paid  (3,680)  (4,731)
 
Fair value of plan assets at end of year  20,292   18,623 
 
Accrued liability $(63,482) $(66,110)
 
Other postretirement benefit plan assets are managed and invested in accordance with all applicable requirements, including ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code. The Company’s investment policy covers a diversified mix of assets, including equity and fixed income securities, real estate, and private equity. Derivative instruments are used primarily as hedging tools but may also be used to gain efficient exposure to the various asset classes.classes and as hedging tools. The Company primarily minimizes the risk of large losses primarily through diversification but also monitors and manages other aspects of risk. The actual composition of the Company’s other postretirement benefit plan assets as of the end of year, along with the targeted mix of assets, is presented below:
                        
 Target 2008 2007  Target 2009 2008 
Domestic equity  27%  26%  31%  22%  26%  26%
International equity 18 18 20  22 22 18 
Fixed income 36 35 30  34 34 35 
Real estate 11 14 13 
Special situations 2   
Real estate investments 12 10 14 
Private equity 8 7 6  8 8 7 
Total  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%  100%
Detailed below is a description of the investment strategies for each major asset category disclosed above:
Domestic equity.This portion of the portfolio comprises a mix of large and small capitalization stocks with generally an equal distribution of value and growth attributes managed both actively and through passive index approaches.
International equity.This portion of the portfolio is actively managed with a blend of growth stocks and value stocks with both developed and emerging market exposure.
Fixed income.This portion of the portfolio is comprised of domestic bonds.
Special situations.Though currently unfunded, this portion of the portfolio was established both to execute opportunistic investment strategies with the objectives of diversifying and enhancing returns and exploiting short-term inefficiencies, as well as to invest in promising new strategies of a longer-term nature.

II-357


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Trust-owned life insurance.Some of the Company’s taxable trusts invest in these investments in order to minimize the impact of taxes on the portfolio.
Real estate investments.Assets in this portion of the portfolio are invested in traditional private market, equity-oriented investments in real properties (indirectly through pooled funds or partnerships) and in publicly traded real estate securities.
Private equity.This portion of the portfolio generally consists of investments in private partnerships that invest in private or public securities typically through privately negotiated and/or structured transactions. Leveraged buyouts, venture capital, and distressed debt are examples of investment strategies within this category.
The fair values of other postretirement benefit plan assets as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 are presented below. These fair value measurements exclude cash, receivables related to investment income, pending investments sales, and payables related to pending investment purchases.
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using  
  Quoted Prices      
  in Active Significant    
  Markets for Other Significant  
  Identical Observable Unobservable  
  Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2009: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
  (in thousands)
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $3,011  $1,245  $  $4,256 
International equity*  3,893   387      4,280 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     5,155      5,155 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     304      304 
Corporate bonds     751      751 
Pooled funds     27      27 
Cash equivalents and other  8   1,295      1,303 
Trust-owned life insurance            
Special situations            
Real estate investments  468      1,475   1,943 
Private equity        1,497   1,497 
 
Total $7,380  $9,164  $2,972  $19,516 
 
Liabilities:                
Derivatives  (12)  (3)     (15)
 
Total $7,368  $9,161  $2,972  $19,501 
 
*Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well-diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.

II-358


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using  
  Quoted Prices      
  in Active Significant    
  Markets for Other Significant  
  Identical Observable Unobservable  
  Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2008: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
  (in thousands)
Assets:                
Domestic equity* $2,857  $1,164  $  $4,021 
International equity*  2,571   238      2,809 
Fixed income:                
U.S. Treasury, government, and agency bonds     5,558      5,558 
Mortgage- and asset-backed securities     570      570 
Corporate bonds     779      779 
Pooled funds     9      9 
Cash equivalents and other  59   888      947 
Trust-owned life insurance            
Special situations            
Real estate investments  391      2,287   2,678 
Private equity        1,335   1,335 
 
Total $5,878  $9,206  $3,622  $18,706 
 
Liabilities:                
Derivatives  (22)        (22)
 
Total $5,856  $9,206  $3,622  $18,684 
 
*Level 1 securities consist of actively traded stocks while Level 2 securities consist of pooled funds. Management believes that the portfolio is well-diversified with no significant concentrations of risk.
Changes in the fair value measurement of the Level 3 items in the other postretirement benefit plan assets valued using significant unobservable inputs for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:
                 
  2009 2008
  Real Estate     Real Estate  
  Investments Private Equity Investments Private Equity
  (in thousands)
Beginning balance $2,287  $1,335  $2,755  $1,371 
Actual return on investments:                
Related to investments held at year end  (676)  87   (372)  (328)
Related to investments sold during the year  (171)  28   10   65 
 
Total return on investments  (847)  115   (362)  (263)
Purchases, sales, and settlements  35   47   (106)  227 
Transfers into/out of Level 3            
 
Ending balance $1,475  $1,497  $2,287  $1,335 
 
The fair values presented above are prepared in accordance with applicable accounting standards regarding fair value. For purposes of determining the fair value of the pension plan assets and the appropriate level designation, management relies on information provided by the plan’s trustee. This information is reviewed and evaluated by management with changes made to the trustee information as appropriate.
Securities for which the activity is observable on an active market or traded exchange are categorized as Level 1. Fixed income securities classified as Level 2 are valued using matrix pricing, a common model using observable inputs. Domestic and international equity securities classified as Level 2 consist of pooled funds where the value is not quoted on an exchange but where the value is determined using observable inputs from the market. Securities that are valued using unobservable inputs are classified as Level 3 and include investments in real estate and investments in limited partnerships. The Company invests (through the pension plan trustee) directly in the limited partnerships which then invest in various types of funds or various private entities within a fund. The fair value

II-359


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
of the limited partnerships’ investments is based on audited annual capital accounts statements which are generally prepared on a fair value basis. The Company also relies on the fact that, in most instances, the underlying assets held by the limited partnerships are reported at fair value. External investment managers typically send valuations to both the custodian and to the Company within 90 days of quarter end. The custodian reports the most recent value available and adjusts the value for cash flows since the statement date for each respective fund.
Amounts recognized in the balance sheets related to the Company’s other postretirement benefit plans consist of the following:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
Regulatory assets $20,491 $17,217 
Other regulatory assets, deferred $14,332 $20,491 
Employee benefit obligations  (66,110)  (57,996)  (63,482)  (66,110)
Presented below are the amounts included in regulatory assets at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008 related to the other postretirement benefit plans that had not yet been recognized in net periodic postretirement benefit cost along with the estimated amortization of such amounts for 2009.2010.
                        
 Prior Service Net(Gain) Transition Prior Service Net (Gain) Transition
 Cost Loss Obligation
 (in thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2009:
 
Regulatory assets $(1,107) $14,811 $628 
 Cost Loss Obligation
 (in thousands) 
Balance at December 31, 2008:
  
Regulatory assets $1,054 $18,020 $1,417  $1,054 $18,020 $1,417 
  
Balance at December 31, 2007:
 
Estimated amortization as net periodic postretirement benefit cost in 2010:
 
Regulatory assets $1,187 $14,180 $1,850  $(57) $403 $228 
 
Estimated amortization as net periodic postretirement benefit cost in 2009:
 
Regulatory assets $106 $540 $346 
The changes in the balance of regulatory assets related to the other postretirement benefit plans for the plan year ended December 31, 2009 and the 15 months ended December 31, 2008 are presented in the following table:
     
  Regulatory
  Assets
  (in thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2007
 $17,217 
Net loss  4,607 
Change in prior service costs/transition obligation   
Reclassification adjustments:    
Amortization of transition obligation  (433)
Amortization of prior service costs  (132)
Amortization of net gain  (768)
 
Total reclassification adjustments  (1,333)
 
Total change  3,274 
 
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $20,491 
Net gain  (2,648)
Change in prior service costs/transition obligation  (2,592)
Reclassification adjustments:    
Amortization of transition obligation  (307)
Amortization of prior service costs  (51)
Amortization of net gain  (561)
 
Total reclassification adjustments  (919)
 
Total change  (6,159)
 
Balance at December 31, 2009
 $14,332 
 

II-344II-360


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
The change in the balance of regulatory assets related to the postretirement benefit plans for the 15-month period ended December 31, 2008 and the 12-month period ended September 30, 2007, is presented in the following table:
     
  Regulatory
  Assets
  (in thousands)
Beginning balance $29,107 
Net (gain) loss  (10,256)
Change in prior service costs   
Reclassification adjustments:    
Amortization of transition obligation  (346)
Amortization of prior service costs  (106)
Amortization of net gain  (1,182)
 
Total reclassification adjustments  (1,634)
 
Total change  (11,890)
 
Balance at December 31, 2007 $17,217 
Net (gain) loss  4,607 
Change in prior service costs   
Reclassification adjustments:    
Amortization of transition obligation  (433)
Amortization of prior service costs  (132)
Amortization of net gain  (768)
 
Total reclassification adjustments  (1,333)
 
Total change  3,274 
 
Balance at December 31, 2008 $20,491 
 
Components of the other postretirement benefit plans’ net periodic cost were as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006  2009 2008 2007 
 (in thousands)  (in thousands) 
Service cost $1,396 $1,372 $1,520  $1,328 $1,396 $1,372 
Interest cost 5,199 5,254 4,654  5,535 5,199 5,254 
Expected return on plan assets  (1,805)  (1,673)  (1,642)  (1,783)  (1,805)  (1,673)
Net amortization 1,066 1,633 1,702  919 1,066 1,633 
Net postretirement cost $5,856 $6,586 $6,234  $5,999 $5,856 $6,586 
The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Medicare Act) provides a 28% prescription drug subsidy for Medicare eligible retirees. The effect of the subsidy reduced the Company’s expenses for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007 by approximately $1.8$1.7 million, $1.8 million, and $2.0$1.8 million, respectively.
Future benefit payments, including prescription drug benefits, reflect expected future service and are estimated based on assumptions used to measure the APBOaccumulated benefit obligation for the postretirement plans. Estimated benefit payments are reduced by drug subsidy receipts expected as a result of the Medicare Act as follows:
             
  Benefit Payments Subsidy Receipts Total
  (in thousands)
2009 $4,629  $(479) $4,150 
2010  5,122   (541)  4,581 
2011  5,540   (616)  4,924 
2012  5,917   (702)  5,215 
2013  6,343   (779)  5,564 
2014 to 2018  36,484   (5,305)  31,179 
 

II-345


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
             
  Benefit Payments Subsidy Receipts Total
  (in thousands)
2010 $4,731  $(520) $4,211 
2011  5,157   (583)  4,574 
2012  5,520   (663)  4,857 
2013  5,943   (730)  5,213 
2014  6,217   (821)  5,396 
2015 to 2019  35,141   (5,395)  29,746 
 
Actuarial Assumptions
The weighted average rates assumed in the actuarial calculations used to determine both the benefit obligations as of the measurement date and the net periodic costs for the pension and other postretirement benefit plans for the following year are presented below. Net periodic benefit costs were calculated in 20052006 for the 20062007 plan year using a discount rate of 5.50%6.00% and an annual salary increase of 3.50%.
             
  2008  2007  2006 
 
Discount  6.75%  6.30%  6.00%
Annual salary increase  3.75   3.75   3.50 
Long-term return on plan assets  8.50   8.50   8.50 
 
             
  2009 2008 2007
Discount rate:            
Pension plans  5.92%  6.75%  6.30%
Other postretirement benefit plans  5.83   6.75   6.30 
Annual salary increase  4.18   3.75   3.75 
Long-term return on plan assets:            
Pension plans  8.50   8.50   8.50 
Other postretirement benefit plans  7.62   7.85   7.77 
 
The Company determinedestimates the long-termexpected rate of return on pension plan and other postretirement benefit plan assets using a financial model to project the expected return on each current investment portfolio. The analysis projects an expected rate of return on each of seven different asset classes in order to arrive at the expected return on the entire portfolio relying on each trust’s target asset allocation and reasonable capital market assumptions. The financial model is based on historicalfour key inputs: anticipated returns by asset class returns(based in part on historical returns), each trust’s asset allocation, an anticipated inflation rate, and current market conditions, taking into account the diversification benefitsprojected impact of investing in multiple asset classes.a periodic rebalancing of each trust’s portfolio.

II-361


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
An additional assumption used in measuring the APBO was a weighted average medical care cost trend rate of 9.15%8.50% for 2009,2010, decreasing gradually to 5.50%5.25% through the year 20152016 and remaining at that level thereafter. An annual increase or decrease in the assumed medical care cost trend rate of 1% would affect the APBO and the service and interest cost components at December 31, 20082009 as follows:
                
 1 Percent 1 Percent 1 Percent 1 Percent
 Increase Decrease Increase Decrease
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
Benefit obligation $5,740 $5,826  $5,025 $4,571 
Service and interest costs 360 307  398 404 
Employee Savings Plan
The Company also sponsors a 401(k) defined contribution plan covering substantially all employees. The Company provides an 85 percent85% matching contribution up to 6 percent6% of an employee’s base salary. Prior to November 2006, the Company matched employee contributions at a rate of 75 percent up to 6 percent of the employee’s base salary. Total matching contributions made to the plan for 2009, 2008, and 2007 and 2006 were $3.9 million, $3.7 million, $3.5 million, and $3.0$3.5 million, respectively.
3. CONTINGENCIES AND REGULATORY MATTERS
General Litigation Matters
The Company is subject to certain claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. In addition, the Company’s business activities are subject to extensive governmental regulation related to public health and the environment.environment such as regulation of air emissions and water discharges. Litigation over environmental issues and claims of various types, including property damage, personal injury, common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of environmental requirements such as opacity and air and water quality standards, has increased generally throughout the United States. In particular, personal injury and other claims for damages caused by alleged exposure to hazardous materials, and common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas and other emissions, have become more frequent. The ultimate outcome of such pending or potential litigation against the Company cannot be predicted at this time; however, for current proceedings not specifically reported herein, management does not anticipate that the liabilities, if any, arising from such current proceedings would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial statements.
Environmental Matters
New Source Review Actions
In November 1999, the EPA brought a civil action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, including Alabama Power and Georgia Power, alleging that these subsidiaries had violated the New Source Review (NSR) provisions of the Clean Air Act and related state laws at certain coal-fired generating facilities. These actions were filed concurrently with the issuance of notices of violations to the Company with respect to the Company’s Plant Watson. After Alabama Power was dismissed from the original action, for jurisdictional reasons, the EPA filed a separate action in January 2001 against Alabama Power in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. In these lawsuits, the EPA allegedalleges that NSR violations occurred at eight coal-fired generating facilities operated by Alabama Power and Georgia Power, including one facility co-owned by the Company. The civil actions request penalties and injunctive relief, including an order requiring installation of the best available

II-346


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
control technology at the affected units. In early 2000, the EPA filed a motion to amend its complaint to add the Company as a defendant based on the allegations in the notices of violation. However, in March 2001, the court denied the motion based on lack of jurisdiction, and the EPA has not re-filed. The original action, now solely against Georgia Power, has been administratively closed since the spring of 2001, and the case has not been reopened.
In June 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama entered a consent decree between Alabama Power and the EPA, resolving a portion of the Alabama Power lawsuit relating to the alleged NSR violations at Plant Miller. The consent decree required Alabama Power to pay $100,000 to resolve the government’s claim for a civil penalty and to donate $4.9 million of sulfur dioxide emission allowances to a nonprofit charitable organization. It also formalized specific emissions reductions to be accomplished by Alabama Power, consistent with other Clean Air Act programs that require emissions reductions. In August 2006, the district court in Alabama granted Alabama Power’s motion for summary judgment and entered final judgment in favor of Alabama Power on the EPA’s claims related to all of the remaining plants: Plants Barry, Gaston, Gorgas, and Greene County.
The plaintiffs appealed the district court’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, where the appeal was stayed, pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in a similar case against Duke Energy. The Supreme Court issued its decision in the Duke Energy case in April 2007, and in December 2007, the Eleventh Circuit vacated the district court’s decision in the Alabama Power case and remanded the case back to the district court for consideration of the legal issues in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Duke Energy case. On July 24, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama granted partial summary judgment in favor of Alabama Power with respect to its other affected units regarding the proper legal test for determining whether projects are routine maintenance, repair, and replacement and therefore are excluded from NSR permitting. The decision did not resolve the case, and the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.which remains ongoing.
The Company believes that it complied with applicable laws and the EPA regulations and interpretations in effect at the time the work in question took place. The Clean Air Act authorizes maximum civil penalties of $25,000 to $37,500 per day, per violation at each

II-362


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
generating unit, depending on the date of the alleged violation. An adverse outcome in either of these cases could require substantial capital expenditures or affect the timing of currently budgeted capital expenditures that cannot be determined at this time and could possibly require payment of substantial penalties. Such expenditures could affect future results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.
Carbon Dioxide Litigation
New York Case
In July 2004, three environmental groups and attorneys general from eight states, each outside of Southern Company’s service territory, and the corporation counsel for New York City filed complaints in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against Southern Company and four other electric power companies. The complaints allege that the companies’ emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, contribute to global warming, which the plaintiffs assert is a public nuisance. Under common law public and private nuisance theories, the plaintiffs seek a judicial order (1) holding each defendant jointly and severally liable for creating, contributing to, and/or maintaining global warming and (2) requiring each of the defendants to cap its emissions of carbon dioxide and then reduce those emissions by a specified percentage each year for at least a decade. The plaintiffs have not, however, requested that damages be awarded in connection with their claims. Southern Company believes these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. In September 2005, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted Southern Company’s and the other defendants’ motions to dismiss these cases. The plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in October 2005 but no decision has been issued. Theand, on September 21, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the district court’s ruling, vacating the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claim, and remanding the case to the district court. On November 5, 2009, the defendants, including Southern Company, sought rehearing en banc, and the court’s ruling is subject to potential appeal. Therefore, the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Kivalina Case
OnIn February 26, 2008, the Native Village of Kivalina and the City of Kivalina filed a suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against several electric utilities (including Southern Company), several oil companies, and a coal company. The plaintiffs are the governing bodies of an Inupiat village in Alaska. The plaintiffs contend that the village is being destroyed by erosion allegedly caused by global warming that the plaintiffs attribute to emissions of greenhouse gases by the defendants. The plaintiffs assert claims for public and private nuisance and contend that some of the defendants have acted in concert and are therefore jointly and severally liable for the plaintiffs’ damages. The suit seeks damages for lost property values and for the cost of relocating the village, which is alleged to be $95 million to $400 million. On June 30, 2008, all defendants filed motions to dismiss this case. Southern Company believes that these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. On September 30, 2009, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss the case based on lack of jurisdiction and ruled the claims were barred by the political question doctrine and by the plaintiffs’ failure to establish the standard for determining that the defendants’ conduct caused the injury alleged. On November 5, 2009, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit challenging the district court’s order dismissing the case. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.

II-347

Other Litigation


NOTES (continued)
Common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas emissions have become more frequent, and courts have recently determined that private parties and states have standing to bring such claims. For example, on October 16, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi’s dismissal of private party claims against certain oil, coal, chemical, and utility companies alleging damages as a result of Hurricane Katrina. In reversing the dismissal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that plaintiffs have standing to assert their nuisance, trespass, and negligence claims and none of these claims are barred by the political question doctrine. The Company is not currently a party to this litigation but was named as a defendant in an amended complaint which was rendered moot in August 2007 by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
when such court dismissed the original matter. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Environmental Remediation
The Company must comply with other environmental laws and regulations that cover the handling and disposal of waste and releases of hazardous substances. Under these various laws and regulations, the Company may also incur substantial costs to clean up

II-363


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
properties. The Company has authority from the Mississippi PSC to recover approved environmental compliance costs through regulatory mechanisms.
In 2003, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) designated the Company as a potentially responsible party at a site in Texas. The site was owned by an electric transformer company that handled the Company’s transformers as well as those of many other entities. The site owner is now in bankruptcy and the State of Texas has entered into an agreement with the Company and several other utilities to investigate and remediate the site. Amounts expensed during 2006, 2007, 2008, and 20082009 related to this work were not material. Hundreds of entities have received notices from the TCEQ requesting their participation in the anticipated site remediation. The final impact of this matter on the Company will depend upon further environmental assessment and the ultimate number of potentially responsible parties. The remediation expenses incurred by the Company are expected to be recovered through the ECOEnvironmental Compliance Overview (ECO) Plan.
The final outcome of these matters cannot now be determined. However, based on the currently known conditions at these sites and the nature and extent of activities relating to these sites, the Company does not believe that additional liabilities, if any, at these sites would be material to the financial statements.
FERC Matters
Market-Based Rate Authority
The Company has authorization from the FERC to sell power to non-affiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices. Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based contract with an affiliate.
In December 2004, the FERC initiated a proceeding to assess Southern Company’s generation dominancemarket power within its retail service territory. The ability to charge market-based rates in other markets is not an issue in the proceeding. Any new market-based rate sales by the Company in Southern Company’s retail service territory entered into during a 15-month refund period that ended in May 2006 could behave been subject to refund to a cost-based rate level.
In November 2007, the presiding administrative law judge issued an initial decision regarding the methodology to be used in the generation dominance tests. The proceedings are ongoing. The ultimate outcome of this generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined, but an adverse decision byOn December 23, 2009, Southern Company and the FERC trial staff reached an agreement in a final order couldprinciple that would resolve the proceeding in its entirety. The agreement does not reflect any finding or suggestion that the Company possesses or has exercised any market power. The agreement likewise does not require the Company to charge cost-based rates for certain wholesalemake any refunds related to sales during the 15-month refund period. Under the agreement, the Company will donate $0.1 million to nonprofit organizations in the Southern CompanyState of Mississippi for the purpose of offsetting the electricity bills of low-income retail service territory, which may be lower than negotiated market-based rates, and could also result in total refunds of up to $8.4 million, plus interest.customers. The Company believes that thereagreement is no meritorious basis for an adverse decision in this proceeding and is vigorously defending itself in this matter.
In June 2007, the FERC issued its final rule in Order No. 697 regarding market-based rate authority. The FERC generally retained its current market-based rate standards. Responding to a number of requests for rehearing, the FERC issued Order No. 697-A on April 21, 2008 and Order No. 697-B on December 12, 2008. These orders largely affirmed the FERC’s prior revision and codification of the regulations governing market-based rates for public utilities. In accordance with the orders, Southern Company submitted to the FERC an updated market power analysis on September 2, 2008 related to its continued market-based rate authority. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
On October 17, 2008, Southern Company filed with the FERC a revised market-based rate (MBR) tariff and a new cost-based rate (CBR) tariff.   The revised MBR tariff provides for a “must offer” energy auction whereby Southern Company offers all of its available energy for sale in a day-ahead auction and an hour-ahead auction with reserve prices not to exceed the CBR tariff price, after considering Southern Company’s native load requirements, reliability obligations, and sales commitments to third parties. All sales under the energy auction would be at market clearing prices established under the auction rules. The new CBR tariff provides for a cost-based price for wholesale sales of less than a year. On December 18, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the MBR tariff subject to certain revisions toreview and approval by the auction proposal. On January 21, 2009, Southern Company made a compliance filing that accepted all the conditions of the MBR tariff order. When this order becomes final, Southern Company will have 30 days to implement the wholesale auction. On December 31, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the CBR tariff subject to providing additional information concerning one aspect of the tariff. On January 30, 2009, Southern Company filed a response

II-348


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
addressing the FERC inquiry to the CBR tariff order. Implementation of the energy auction in accordance with the MBR tariff order is expected to adequately mitigate going forward any presumption of market power that Southern Company may have in the Southern Company retail service territory. The timing of when the FERC may issue the final orders on the MBR and CBR tariffs and the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.FERC.
Intercompany Interchange Contract
The Company’s generation fleet is operated under the Intercompany Interchange Contract (IIC), as approved by the FERC. In May 2005, the FERC initiated a new proceeding to examine (1) the provisions of the IIC among the traditional operating companies (including the Company), Southern Power, and Southern Company Services, Inc., as agent, under the terms of which the power pool of Southern Company is operated, (2) whether any parties to the IIC have violated the FERC’s standards of conduct applicable to utility companies that are transmission providers, and (3) whether Southern Company’s code of conduct defining Southern Power as a “system company” rather than a “marketing affiliate” is just and reasonable. In connection with the formation of Southern Power, the FERC authorized Southern Power’s inclusion in the IIC in 2000. The FERC also previously approved Southern Company’s code of conduct.
In October 2006, the FERC issued an order accepting a settlement resolving the proceeding subject to Southern Company’s agreement to accept certain modifications to the settlement’s terms andterms. Southern Company notified the FERC that it accepted the modifications. The modifications largely involve functional separation and information restrictions related to marketing activities conducted on behalf of Southern Power. In November 2006, Southern Company filed with the FERC a compliance plan in connection with the order. In April 2007, the FERC approved, with certain modifications, the plan submitted by Southern Company. Implementation of the plan did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements. In November 2007, Southern Company notified the FERC that the plan had been implemented. OnIn December 12, 2008, the FERC division of audits issued for public comment its final audit report pertaining to compliance implementation and related matters. No comments were submitted challenging the audit report’s findings were submitted. Aof Southern Company’s compliance. The proceeding remains open pending a decision is now pending from the FERC.FERC regarding the audit report.

II-364


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Wholesale Rate Filing
OnIn August 29, 2008, Mississippi Powerthe Company filed with the FERC a request for revised wholesale electric tariff and rates. Prior to making this filing, Mississippi Powerthe Company reached a settlement with all of its customers who take service under the tariff. This settlement agreement was filed with the FERC as part of the request. The settlement agreement provided for an increase in annual base wholesale revenues in the amount of $5.8 million, effective January 1, 2009. In addition, the settlement agreement allows Mississippi Powerthe Company to increase its annual accrual for the wholesale portion of property damage to $303,000 per year, to defer any property damage costs prudently incurred in excess of the wholesale property damage reserve balance, and to defer the wholesale portion of the generation screening and evaluation costs associated with the integrated coal gasification combined cycle (IGCC) project to be located in Kemper County Mississippi. The settlement agreement also provided that Mississippi Powerthe Company will not seek a change in wholesale full-requirements rates before November 1, 2010, except for changes associated with the fuel adjustment clause and the energy cost management clause,ECM, changes associated with property damages that exceed the amount in the wholesale property damage reserve, and changes associated with costs and expenses associated with environmental requirements affecting fossil fuel generating facilities. OnIn October 24, 2008, Mississippi Powerthe Company received notice that the FERC had accepted the filing effective November 1, 2008, and the revised monthly charges were applied beginning January 1, 2009. As result of the order, the Company reclassified $9.3 million of previously expensed generation screening and evaluation costs to a regulatory asset. See “Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle” herein for additional information.
Right of Way Litigation
Southern Company and certain of its subsidiaries, including the Company, Gulf Power, and Southern Telecom, Inc., (a subsidiary of SouthernLINC Wireless), have been named as defendants in numerous lawsuits brought by landowners since 2001. The plaintiffs’ lawsuits claim that defendants may not use, or sublease to third parties, some or all of the fiber optic communications lines on the rights of way that cross the plaintiffs’ properties and that such actions exceed the easements or other property rights held by defendants. The plaintiffs assert claims for, among other things, trespass and unjust enrichment and seek compensatory and punitive damages and injunctive relief. Management of the Company believes that it has complied with applicable laws and that the plaintiffs’ claims are without merit.

II-349


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
To date, the Company has entered into agreements with plaintiffs in approximately 95% of the actions pending against the Company to clarify the Company’s easement rights in the State of Mississippi. These agreements have been approved by the Circuit Courts of Harrison County and Jasper County, Mississippi (First Judicial Circuit), and dismissals of the related cases are in progress.have been dismissed. These agreements have not hadresulted in any material impacteffects on the Company’s financial statements.
In addition, in late 2001, certain subsidiaries of Southern Company, including Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, the Company, and Southern Telecom, Inc., (a subsidiary of SouthernLINC Wireless), were named as defendants in a lawsuit brought in Troup County, Georgia, Superior Court by Interstate Fiber Network,Fibernet, Inc., a subsidiary of telecommunications company ITC DeltaCom, Inc. that uses certain of the defendants’ rights of way. This lawsuit alleges, among other things, that the defendants are contractually obligated to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the telecommunications company from any liability that may be assessed against it in pending and future right of way litigation. The Company believes that the plaintiff’s claims are without merit. In the fall of 2004, the trial court stayed the case until resolution of the underlying landowner litigation discussed above. In January 2005, the Georgia Court of Appeals dismissed the telecommunications company’s appeal of the trial court’s order for lack of jurisdiction. An adverse outcome in this matter, combined with an adverse outcome against the telecommunications company in one or more of the right of way lawsuits, could result in substantial judgments; however, the final outcome of these matters cannot now be determined.
Retail Regulatory Matters
Performance Evaluation Plan
The Company’s retail base rates are set under the Performance Evaluation Plan (PEP), a rate plan approved by the Mississippi PSC. PEP was designed with the objective that PEP would reduce the impact of rate changes on the customer and provide incentives for the Company to keep customer prices low and customer satisfaction and reliability high. PEP is a mechanism for rate adjustments based on three indicators: price, customer satisfaction, and service reliability.
In May 2004, the Mississippi PSC approved the Company’s request to modify certain portions of itsthe PEP and to reclassify to jurisdictional cost of service the 266 megawattsMWs of Plant Daniel Units 3 and 4 capacity, effective January 1, 2004. The Mississippi PSC authorized the Company to include the related costs and revenue credits in jurisdictional rate base, cost of service, and revenue requirement calculations for purposes of retail rate recovery. The Company amortized the regulatory liability pursuant to the

II-365


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Mississippi PSC’s order, over a four-year period, resulting in increases to earnings in each of those years. The amounts amortized werefinal amortization of $5.7 million and $13.0 millionoccurred in 2007 and 2006, respectively.2007.
In addition, in May 2004, the Mississippi PSC approved the Company’s requested changes to PEP, including the use of a forward-looking test year, with appropriate oversight; annual, rather than semi-annual, filings; and certain changes to the performance indicator mechanisms. Rate changes will beare limited to four percent4% of retail revenues annually under the revised PEP. PEP will remain in effect until the Mississippi PSC modifies, suspends, or terminates the plan. In the May 2004 order, the Mississippi PSC ordered that the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff and the Company review the operations of the PEP in 2007. By mutual agreement, this review was deferred until 2008 and is currently ongoing. The outcome ofcontinued into 2009. On March 2, 2009, concurrent with this review, is cannot now be determined.the annual PEP evaluation filing for 2009 was suspended. On August 3, 2009, the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff and the Company filed a joint report with the Mississippi PSC proposing several changes to the PEP. On November 9, 2009, the Mississippi PSC approved the revised PEP, which resulted in a lower performance incentive under the PEP and therefore smaller and/or less frequent rate changes in the future. On November 16, 2009, the Company resumed annual evaluations and filed its annual PEP filing for 2010 under the revised PEP, which resulted in a lower allowed return on investment but no rate change.
In April 2007, the Mississippi PSC issued an order allowing the Company to defer certain reliability relatedreliability-related maintenance costs beginning January 1, 2007 and recover them evenly over a four-year period beginning January 1, 2008. These costs related to maintenance that was needed as follow-up to emergency repairs that were made subsequent to Hurricane Katrina. At December 31, 2007, the Company had incurred and deferred the retail portion of $9.5 million of such costs. At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had a balance of the deferred retail portion of $7.1$4.7 million with $2.4$2.3 million included in current assets as other regulatory assets and $4.7$2.4 million included in long-term other regulatory assets.
In September 2007, the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff and the Company entered into a stipulation that included adjustments to expenses which resulted in a one-time credit to retail customers of approximately $1.1 million. In November 2007, the Mississippi PSC issued an order requiring the Company to refund this amount to its retail customers no later than December 2007. This amount was totally refunded as a credit to customer bills by December 31, 2007.
In December 2007, the Company submitted its annual PEP filing for 2008, which resulted in a rate increase of 1.983% or $15.5 million annually, effective January 2008. In December 2006, the Company submitted its annual PEP filing for 2007, which resulted in no rate change.

II-350


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
In December 2007, the Company received an order from the Mississippi PSC requiring it to defer $1.4 million associated with the retail portion of certain tax credits and adjustments related to permanent differences pertaining to its 2006 income tax returns filed in September 2007. These tax differences were recorded in a regulatory liability included in the current portion of other regulatory liabilities and were amortized ratably over the twelve month12-month period beginning January 2008. The amortization of $1.4 million is included in Income Taxesincome taxes on the Statementstatement of Income.income for 2008.
On March 14, 2008,16, 2009, the Company submitted its annual PEP lookback filing for 2007,2008, which recommended no surcharge or refund. At the conclusion of the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff’s review of the PEP lookback filing for 2007,2008, the Company and Mississippi Public Utilities Staff jointly submitted a stipulation to the CommissionMississippi PSC which recommended no surcharge or refund.
The Mississippi Public Utilities Staff, pursuant to the Mississippi PSC’s 2004 order approving the current PEP plan, is reviewing PEP to determine if any modifications should be made to the plan. Concurrent with this review, the annual PEP evaluation filing for 2009 was delayed by order of the Mississippi PSC and was scheduled to be filed on or before March 9, 2009. On February 23, 2009, however, the Company requested that the Mississippi PSC issue an order suspending the 2009 PEP evaluation filing to continue the scheduled review of the plan. The Company does not anticipate that suspending the PEP filing for 2009 will have a material impact on 2009 earnings. The Company anticipates that, as a result of the required review, changes to the plan will be made. Annual evaluations would resume for 2010 under a revised PEP plan. The final outcome cannot be determined at this time.
System Restoration Rider
In September 2006, the Company filed with the Mississippi PSC a request to implement a System Restoration Rider (SRR),SRR to increase the Company’s cap on the property damage reserve and to authorize the calculation of an annual property damage accrual based on a formula. The purpose of the SRR is to provide for recovery of costs associated with property damage (including certain property insurance and the costs of self insurance) and to facilitate the Mississippi PSC’s review of these costs. The Company would be required to make annual SRR filings to determine the revenue requirement associated with the property damage. The Company recorded a regulatory liability in the amount of approximately $2.4 million in 2006 and $0.6 million in 2007 for the estimated amount due to retail customers that would be passed through SRR. In November 2007, the Company along with the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff has agreed and stipulated to a revised SRR calculation method that would no longer require the Mississippi PSC to set a cap on the property damage reserve or to authorize the calculation of an annual property damage accrual. Under the revised SRR calculation method, the Mississippi PSC would periodically agree on SRR revenue levels that would be developed based on historical data, expected exposure, type and amount of insurance coverage excluding insurance costs, and other relevant information.

II-366


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
On January 9, 2009, the Mississippi PSC issued an order accepting the stipulation and the revised SRR calculation method. The applicable SRR rate level will be adjusted every three years, unless a significant change in circumstances occurs such that the Company and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff or the Mississippi PSC deems that a more frequent change would be appropriate. The Company will submit annual filings setting forth SRR-related revenues, expenses, and investment for the projected filing period, as well as the true-up for the prior period. As a result, the December 2008 retail regulatory liability of $6.8 million was reclassified to the Property Damage Reserve.property damage reserve. On February 2, 2009, the Company submitted its 2009 SRR rate filing with the Mississippi PSC, which proposed that the 2009 SRR rate level remain at zero and the Company be allowed to accrue approximately $4.0 million to the property damage reserve in 2009. On September 10, 2009, the Mississippi PSC issued an order requiring the Company to develop SRR factors designed to reduce SRR revenue by approximately $1.5 million from November 2009 to March 2010 under the new rate. On January 29, 2010, the Company submitted its 2010 SRR rate filing with the Mississippi PSC, which proposed that the Company be allowed to accrue approximately $3.0 million to the property damage reserve in 2010. The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
Environmental Compliance Overview Plan
On February 3, 2009,12, 2010, the Company submitted its 20092010 ECO Plan Noticenotice which proposesproposed an increase in annual revenues for the Company of 19 cents per 1,000 KWH for residential customers.approximately $3.9 million. In its 2010 ECO filing, the Company is proposing to change the true-up provision of the ECO rate schedule to consider actual revenues collected in addition to actual costs. The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined. On February 1,3, 2009, the Company submitted its 2009 ECO Plan notice which proposed an increase in annual revenues for the Company of approximately $1.5 million. On June 19, 2009, the Mississippi PSC approved the ECO Plan with the new rates effective June 2009. In February 2008, the Company filed with the Mississippi PSC its annual ECO Plan evaluation for 2008. After the filing of the ECO Plan evaluation onin February 1, 2008, the regulations addressing mercury emissions were altered by a decision issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit onin February 8, 2008. OnIn April 7, 2008, Mississippi Powerthe Company filed with the Mississippi PSC a supplemental ECO Plan evaluation in which the projects included in the ECO Plan evaluation onin February 1, 2008 being undertaken primarily for mercury control were removed. In this supplemental ECO Plan filing, Mississippi Powerthe Company requested a 15 cent per 1,000 KWHkilowatt-hour decrease for retail residential customers. The Mississippi PSC approved the supplemental ECO Plan evaluation onin June 11, 2008, with the new rates effective in June 2008. In April 2007, the Mississippi PSC approved the Company’s 2007 ECO Plan, which included an 86 cents per 1,000 KWH increase for retail residential customers. This increase represented an addition of approximately $7.5 million in annual revenues for the Company. The new rates were effective in April 2007.

II-351


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Fuel Cost Recovery
The Company establishes, annually, a retail fuel cost recovery factor that is approved by the Mississippi PSC. Over the past several years, the Company has continued to experience higher than expected fuel costs for coal and natural gas. The Company is required to file for an adjustment to the retail fuel cost recovery factor annually; such filing occurred inon November 2008. On December 29, 2008, the16, 2009. The Mississippi PSC held a hearing onapproved the Company’s proposed increase in itsretail fuel cost recovery factor. On February 11,factor on December 15, 2009, with the hearing examiner submitted a formal recommendation to the Mississippi PSC for approval of the factor as filed, with recovery proposed for the remaining calendar months of 2009. Any over or under recovery of fuel costs for 2009 would be addressednew rates effective in the Company’s 2010 fuel cost recovery filing.January 2010. The recommendation is under review by the Mississippi PSC at this time; therefore, the final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined. The proposed retail fuel cost recovery factor will result in an annual increasedecrease in an amount equal to 12.2%11.3% of total 20082009 retail revenue. At December 31, 2008,2009, the amount of underover recovered retail fuel costscost included in the balance sheetsheets was $36.0$29.4 million compared to $24.5$36.0 million under recovered at December 31, 2007.2008. The Company also has a wholesale Municipal and Rural Associations (MRA) and a Market BaseBased (MB) fuel cost recovery factor. Effective January 1, 2009,2010, the wholesale MRA fuel rate increaseddecreased, resulting in an annual increasedecrease in an amount equal to 13.9%20.9% of total 20082009 MRA revenue. Effective February 1, 2009,2010, the wholesale MB fuel rate increaseddecreased, resulting in an annual increasedecrease in an amount equal to 16.7%16.9% of total 20082009 MB revenue. At December 31, 2008,2009, the amount of underover recovered wholesale MRA and MB fuel costs included in the balance sheets was $16.8 million and $2.4 million compared to $15.4 million and $3.7 million, compared to $13.7 million and $2.3 million, respectively, under recovered at December 31, 2007.2008. The Company’s operating revenues are adjusted for differences in actual recoverable fuel cost and amounts billed in accordance with the currently approved cost recovery rate. Accordingly, this increasedecrease to the billing factor will have no significant effect on the Company’s revenues or net income, but will increasedecrease annual cash flow.
OnIn October 7, 2008, the Mississippi PSC opened a docket to investigate and review interest and carrying charges under the fuel adjustment clause for utilities within the State of Mississippi including the Company. On March 4, 2009, the Mississippi Power. A hearingPSC issued an order to apply the prime rate in calculating the carrying costs on the retail over or under recovery balances related to fuel cost recovery. On May 20, 2009, the Company filed the carrying cost calculation methodology as part of its compliance filing.
In August 2009, the Mississippi PSC engaged an independent professional audit firm to conduct an audit of the Company’s fuel-related expenditures included in the fuel adjustment clause and energy cost management clause of 2008 and 2009. The audit was held November 6, 2008, to hear testimony regardingcompleted in December 2009. There were no audit findings identified in the method of calculating carrying charges on over and under recoveries of fuel-related costs. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.audit.

II-367


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Storm Damage Cost Recovery
In August 2005, Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast of the United States and caused significant damage within the Company’s service area. The estimated total storm restoration costs relating to Hurricane Katrina through December 31, 2007 of $302.4 million, which was net of expected insurance proceeds of approximately $77 million, without offset for the property damage reserve of $3.0 million, was affirmed by the Mississippi PSC in June 2006, and the Company was ordered to establish a regulatory asset for the retail portion. The Mississippi PSC issued an order directing the Company to file an application with the MDA for a CDBG.Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). In October 2006, the Company received from the MDA a CDBG in the amount of $276.4 million, which was allocated to both the retail and wholesale jurisdictions. In the same month, the Mississippi PSC issued a financing order that authorized the issuance of system restoration bonds for the remaining $25.2 million of the retail portion of storm recovery costs not covered by the CDBG. These funds were received in June 2007. The Company affirmed the $302.4 million total storm costs incurred as of December 31, 2007. TheOn March 2, 2009, the Company plans to filefiled with the Mississippi PSC its final accounting of the restoration cost relating to Hurricane Katrina and the storm operations center by the end of the first quarter 2009, at which time thecenter. The final net retail receivable of approximately $3.2 million is expected to be recovered.recovered in 2010.
Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle
On January 16, 2009, the Company filed for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity with the Mississippi PSC to allow construction of a new electric generating plant located in Kemper County, Mississippi. The plant would utilize an advanced coal IGCC technology with an output capacity of 582 megawatts.MWs. The Kemper IGCC will use locally mined lignite (an abundant, lower heating value coal) from a proposed mine adjacent to the plant as fuel. This certificate, if approved by the Mississippi PSC, would authorize the Company to acquire, construct, and operate the Kemper IGCC and related facilities. The Kemper IGCC, subject to federal and state environmental reviews and certain regulatory approvals, is expected to begin commercial operation in November 2013.May 2014. As part of its filing, the Company has requested certain rate recovery treatment in accordance with the base load construction legislation.State of Mississippi Baseload Act of 2008.
The Company filed an application in June 2006 with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for certain tax credits available to projects using clean coal technologies under the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The DOE subsequently certified the Kemper IGCC, and in November 2006 the IRSInternal Revenue Service (IRS) allocated Internal Revenue Code Section 48A tax credits of $133 million to the Company. On May 11, 2009, the Company received notification from the IRS formally certifying these tax credits. The utilization of these credits is dependent upon meeting the certification requirements for the Kemper IGCC, including an in-service date no later than November 2013.May 2014. The Company has secured all environmental reviews and permits necessary to commence construction of the

II-352


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
Kemper IGCC and has entered into a binding contract for the steam turbine generator, completing two milestone requirements for the Section 48A credits.
OnIn February 14, 2008, the Company also requested that the DOE transfer the remaining funds previously granted to a cancelled Southern Company project that would have been located in Orlando, Florida. OnIn December 12, 2008, an agreement was reached to assign the remaining funds to the Kemper IGCC. The estimated construction cost of the Kemper IGCC is approximately $2.2$2.4 billion, which is net of $220$245 million related to funding to be received from the DOE related to project construction. The remaining DOE funding of $50$25 million is projected to be used for demonstration over the first few years of operation.
On April 6, 2009, the Governor of the State of Mississippi signed into law a bill that will provide an ad valorem tax exemption for a portion of the assessed value of all property utilized in certain electric generating facilities with integrated gasification process facilities. This tax exemption, which may not exceed 50% of the total value of the project, is for projects with a capital investment from private sources of $1 billion or more. The Company expects the Kemper IGCC, including the gasification portion, to be a qualifying project under the law.
Beginning in December 2006, the Mississippi PSC has approved the Company’s requested accounting treatment to defer the costs associated with the Company’s generation resource planning, evaluation, and screening activities as a regulatory asset. OnIn December 22, 2008, the Company requested an amendment to its original order that would allow these costs to continue to be charged to and remain in a regulatory asset until January 1, 2010. In its application,On April 6, 2009, the Company reported that it anticipated spending approximately $61 millionreceived an accounting order from the Mississippi PSC directing the Company to continue to charge all generation resource planning, evaluation, and screening costs to regulatory assets including those costs associated with activities to obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity and costs necessary and prudent to preserve the availability, economic viability, and/or required schedule of the Kemper IGCC generation resource planning, evaluation, and screening activities until the Mississippi PSC makes findings and determination as to the recovery of the Company’s prudent expenditures. The Mississippi PSC’s determination of prudence for the Company’s pre-construction costs is scheduled to occur by or before May 31, 2009. At2010. As of December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had spent $42.3a total of $73.5 million ofassociated with the $61Company’s

II-368


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
generation resource planning, evaluation, and screening activities, including regulatory filing costs. Costs incurred for the year ended December 31, 2009 totaled $31.2 million of which $3.7as compared to $24.2 million related to land purchases capitalized.for the year ended December 31, 2008. Of the remaining amount, $0.8total $73.5 million, was expensed and $37.8$68.5 million was deferred in other regulatory assets.assets, $4.0 million was related to land purchases capitalized, and $1.0 million was expensed.
On June 5, 2009, the Mississippi PSC issued an order initiating an evaluation of the Kemper IGCC and establishing a two-phase procedural schedule. On August 4, 2009, the Mississippi PSC ordered a two-part hearing process to evaluate the need for and the resources and cost of the new generating capacity separately. On November 9, 2009, the Mississippi PSC issued an order that found the Company has a demonstrated need for additional capacity of approximately 304 MWs to 1,276 MWs based on an analysis of expected load forecasts, costs, and anticipated retirements. Hearings related to the appropriate resource to meet that need as well as cost recovery of that resource through application of the State of Mississippi’s Baseload Act of 2008 were held in February 2010. A decision on the resources and cost recovery is expected to be made by May 1, 2010.
On September 15, 2009, South Mississippi Electric Power Association (SMEPA) signed a non-binding letter of intent to explore the acquisition of an interest in the Kemper IGCC. The Company and SMEPA are evaluating a combination of a joint ownership arrangement and a power purchase agreement which would provide SMEPA with up to 20% of the capacity and associated energy output from the Kemper IGCC.
The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
4. JOINT OWNERSHIP AGREEMENTS
The Company and Alabama Power own, as tenants in common, Units 1 and 2 (total capacity of 500 megawatts)MWs) at Greene County Steam Plant, which is located in Alabama and operated by Alabama Power. Additionally, the Company and Gulf Power, own as tenants in common, Units 1 and 2 (total capacity of 1,000 megawatts)MWs) at Plant Daniel, which is located in Mississippi and operated by the Company.
At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company’s percentage ownership and investment in these jointly owned facilities were as follows:
                        
Generating Percent Gross Accumulated Percent Gross Accumulated
Plant Ownership Investment Depreciation Ownership Investment Depreciation
 (in thousands) (in thousands)
Greene County  40% $83,721 $43,295   40% $85,498 $42,068 
Units 1 and 2  
  
Daniel  50% $273,134 $135,905   50% $274,415 $139,608 
Units 1 and 2  
The Company’s proportionate share of plant operating expenses is included in the statements of income and the Company is responsible for its own financing.
5. INCOME TAXES
Southern Company files a consolidated federal income tax return and combined income tax returns for the State of Alabama and the State of Mississippi. Under a joint consolidated income tax allocation agreement, each subsidiary’s current and deferred tax expense is computed on a stand-alone basis and no subsidiary is allocated more expense than would be paid if it filed a separate income tax return. In accordance with Internal Revenue ServiceIRS regulations, each company is jointly and severally liable for the tax liability.

II-353II-369


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Current and Deferred Income Taxes
Details of the income tax provisions were as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006  2009 2008 2007 
 (in thousands)  (in thousands) 
Federal —  
Current $20,834 $79,127 $79,332  $77,619 $20,834 $79,127 
Deferred 22,054  (34,524)  (36,889)  (32,980) 22,054  (34,524)
 42,888 44,603 42,443  44,639 42,888 44,603 
State —  
Current 2,675 9,274 16,300  12,444 2,675 9,274 
Deferred 2,786  (2,047)  (10,646)  (6,869) 2,786  (2,047)
 5,461 7,227 5,654  5,575 5,461 7,227 
Total $48,349 $51,830 $48,097  $50,214 $48,349 $51,830 
The tax effects of temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and their respective tax bases, which give rise to deferred tax assets and liabilities, are as follows:
                
 2008 2007  2009 2008 
 (in thousands)  (in thousands) 
Deferred tax liabilities —  
Accelerated depreciation $261,091 $230,379  $279,683 $261,091 
Basis differences 29,089 39,944  19,730 29,089 
Fuel clause under recovered 25,534 10,570   25,534 
Energy cost management clause under recovered 25,232  
Regulatory assets associated with asset retirement obligations 7,100 6,790  6,876 7,100 
Regulatory assets associated with employee benefit obligations 37,003 15,139  43,535 37,003 
Other 20,915 46,442  21,679 20,915 
Total 380,732 349,264  396,735 380,732 
  
Deferred tax assets —  
Federal effect of state deferred taxes 10,724 9,535  8,979 10,724 
Fuel clause over recovered 44,009  
Energy cost management clause over recovered  2,264 
Other property basis differences 7,338 8,030  7,367 7,338 
Pension and other benefits 56,024 33,622  64,553 56,024 
Property insurance 21,997 26,005  22,365 21,997 
Unbilled fuel 10,400 10,045  12,194 10,400 
Other comprehensive loss 0  (371)
Long-term service agreement 21,317 16,595 
Asset retirement obligations 7,100 6,790  6,876 7,100 
Regulatory liabilities associated with employee benefit obligations 0 20,433 
Other 36,617 29,785  18,246 17,758 
Total 150,200 143,874  205,906 150,200 
Total deferred tax liabilities, net 230,532 205,390  190,829 230,532 
Portion included in (accrued) prepaid income taxes, net  (8,208) 1,428  32,237  (8,208)
Accumulated deferred income taxes $222,324 $206,818  $223,066 $222,324 

II-354II-370


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
At December 31, 2008,2009, the tax-related regulatory assets and liabilities were $8.9$9.0 million and $15.0$14.9 million, respectively. These assets are attributable to tax benefits flowed through to customers in prior years and to taxes applicable to capitalized interest. These liabilities are attributable to deferred taxes previously recognized at rates higher than the current enacted tax law and to unamortized investment tax credits.
In accordance with regulatory requirements, deferred investment tax credits are amortized over the lives of the related property with such amortization normally applied as a credit to reduce depreciation in the statements of income. Credits amortized in this manner amounted to $1.2 million, $1.1$1.2 million, and $1.1 million for 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006,2007, respectively. At December 31, 2008,2009, all investment tax credits available to reduce federal income taxes payable had been utilized.
Effective Tax Rate
The provision for income taxes differs from the amount of income taxes determined by applying the applicable U.S. federal statutory rate to earnings before income taxes and preferred dividends as a result of the following:
            
 2008 2007 2006             
 2009 2008 2007 
Federal statutory rate  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%
State income tax, net of federal deduction 2.6 3.0 3.0  2.7 2.6 3.0 
Non-deductible book depreciation 0.3 0.3 0.3  0.3 0.3 0.3 
Production activities deduction  (0.4)  (0.5)  (0.1)  (1.1)  (0.4)  (0.5)
Medicare subsidy  (0.5)  (0.5)  (0.5)  (0.4)  (0.5)  (0.5)
Amortization of permanent tax items(a)
  (0.7)    0.0  (0.7)  
Other  (0.8) 0.4  (1.4) 0.2  (0.8) 0.4 
Effective income tax rate  35.5%  37.7%  36.3%  36.7%  35.5%  37.7%
(a) Amortization of Regulatory Liability Tax Credits. See Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters — Performance Evaluation Plan.”
The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 created a tax deduction for a portion of income attributable to U.S. production activities as defined in the IRCInternal Revenue Code Section 199 (production activities deduction). The deduction is equal to a stated percentage of qualified production activities net income. The percentage is phased in over the years 2005 through 2010 with a 3% rate applicable to the years 2005 and 2006, a 6% rate applicable for the years 2007 through 2009, and a 9% rate thereafter. This increase from 3% in 2006 to 6% in 2007 was one of several factors that increased the Company’s 2007 deduction by $0.3 million over the 2006 deduction. The resulting additional tax benefit was over $0.1 million. The IRS has not clearly defined a methodology for calculating this deduction. However, Southern Company has agreedreached an agreement with the IRS on a calculation methodology and signed a closing agreement onin December 11, 2008. Therefore, in 2008, the Company reversed the unrecognized tax benefit related to the calculation methodology and adjusted the deduction for all previous years to conform to the agreement which resulted in a decrease in the 2008 deduction when compared to the 2007 deduction. Certain aspects of the production activities deduction remain unresolved. The net impact of the reversal of the unrecognized tax benefits combined with the application of the new methodology had no material effect on the Company’s financial statements.
Unrecognized Tax Benefits
FIN 48 requires companies to determine whether it is “more likely than not” that a tax position will be sustained upon examination by the appropriate taxing authorities before any part of the benefit can be recorded in the financial statements. It also provides guidance on the recognition, measurement, and classification of income tax uncertainties, along with any related interest and penalties. For 2008,2009, the total amount of unrecognized tax benefits increased $0.8by $1.2 million, resulting in a balance of $1.8$3.0 million as of December 31, 2008. 2009.
Changes during the year in unrecognized tax benefits were as follows:
        
 2008 2007             
 (in thousands)  2009 2008 2007 
 (in thousands) 
Unrecognized tax benefits at beginning of year $935 $656  $1,772 $935 $656 
Tax positions from current periods 653 177  1,309 653 177 
Tax positions from prior periods 265 102   (55) 265 102 
Reductions due to settlements  (81)     (81)   
Reductions due to expired statute of limitations       
Balance at end of year $1,772 $935  $3,026 $1,772 $935 

II-355II-371


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
The reduction duetax positions from current periods increase for 2009 relate primarily to settlements relates to the agreement with the IRS regarding the production activities deduction methodology.tax position and other miscellaneous uncertain tax positions. The tax positions increase from prior periods for 2009 relates primarily to the production activities deduction tax position. See “Effective Tax Rate” above for additional information.
Impact on the Company’s effective tax rate, if recognized, is as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 Change 2009 2008 2007 
 (in thousands) (in thousands) 
   
Tax positions impacting the effective tax rate $1,772 $935 $837  $3,026 $1,772 $935 
Tax positions not impacting the effective tax rate        
Balance of unrecognized tax benefits $1,772 $935 $837  $3,026 $1,772 $935 
Accrued interest for unrecognized tax benefits:benefits was as follows:
                    
 2008 2007 2009 2008 2007 
 (in thousands) (in thousands) 
   
Interest accrued at beginning of year $106 $37  $203 $106 $37 
Interest reclassified due to settlements  (17)     (17)   
Interest accrued during the year 114 69  27 114 69 
Balance at end of year $203 $106  $230 $203 $106 
The Company classifies interest on tax uncertainties as interest expense. The Company did not accrue any penalties on uncertain tax positions.
It is reasonably possible that the amount of the unrecognized benefit with respect to a majority of the Company’s unrecognized tax positions will significantly increase or decrease within the next 12 months. The possible conclusion or settlement of federal or state audits could impact the balances significantly. At this time, an estimate of the range of reasonably possible outcomes cannot be determined.
The IRS has audited and closed all tax returns prior to 2004. The audits for the state returns have either been concluded, or the statute of limitations has expired, for years prior to 2002.2006.
6. FINANCING
Long-Term Debt Payable to Affiliated Trust
The Company formed a wholly-owned trust subsidiary for the purpose of issuing preferred securities. At December 31, 2008 there were no outstanding trust preferred securities.
Bank Term Loans
In 2008, the Company borrowed $80 million under a three-year term loan agreement. The proceeds were used for general corporate purposes.purposes, including the Company’s continuous construction program.
Senior Notes
TheIn March 2009, the Company issued $50$125 million of Series 2008A 6.00%2009A 5.55% Senior Notes due November 15, 2013 during the fourth quarter of 2008.March 1, 2019. Proceeds were used to repay at maturity the Company’s $40.0 million aggregate principal amount of Series F Floating Rate Senior Notes due March 9, 2009, to repay a portion of its short-term indebtedness and for general corporate purposes, including the Company’s continuous construction program. In November 2008, the Company issued $50.0 million of Series 2008A 6.00% Senior Notes due November 15, 2013. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, and 2007, Mississippi Powerthe Company had a total of $330 million and $245 million, and $195 millionrespectively, of senior notes outstanding, respectively.outstanding.
Securities Due Within One Year
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company has scheduled maturities of capital leases and senior notes due within one year totalingof $1.3 million and $1.2 million, andrespectively. At December 31, 2008, the Company also had senior notes of $40.0 million respectively. There were $1.1 million of capital leases due within one year at December 31, 2007.year.
Maturities through 2013 applicable to total long-term debt are as follows: $1.3 million in 2010; $81.4 million in 2011; $0.6 million in 2012; and $50.0 million in 2013. There are no scheduled maturities in 2014.

II-356II-372


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
Debt maturities through 2013 applicable to total long-term debt are as follows: $41.2 million in 2009; $1.3 million in 2010; $81.4 million in 2011; $0.6 million in 2012, and $50 million in 2013.
Pollution Control Revenue Bonds
Pollution control obligations represent loans to the Company from public authorities of funds derived from sales by such authorities of revenue bonds issued to finance pollution control facilities. The Company is required to make payments sufficient for authorities to meet principal and interest requirements of such bonds. The amount of tax-exempt pollution control revenue bonds outstanding at December 31, 2009 and 2008 was $82.7 million. In September 2008, the Company was required to purchase a total of approximately $7.9 million of variable rate pollution control revenue bonds that were tendered by investors. In December 2008, the bonds were successfully remarketed. On the statement of cash flow for 2008, the $7.9 million is presented as proceeds and redemptions.
Outstanding Classes of Capital Stock
The Company currently has preferred stock (including depositary preferred stock (each share of depositary preferred stock representingshares which represent one-fourth of a share of preferred stock), and common stock authorized and outstanding. The preferred stock of the Company contains a feature that allows the holders to elect a majority of the Company’s board of directors if dividends are not paid for four consecutive quarters. Because such a potential redemption-triggering event is not solely within the control of the Company, this preferred stock is presented as “Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock” in a manner consistent with temporary equity under applicable accounting standards. The Company’s preferred stock and depositary preferred stock, without preference between classes, rank senior to the Company’s common stock with respect to payment of dividends and voluntary or involuntary dissolution. Certain series of the preferred stock and depositary preferred stock are subject to redemption at the option of the Company on or after a specified date (typically 5five or 10 years after the date of issuance) at a redemption price equal to 100% of the liquidation amount of the stock.
Dividend Restrictions
The Company can only pay dividends to Southern Company out of retained earnings or paid-in-capital.
Bank Credit Arrangements
At the beginning of 2009,2010, the Company had total unused committed credit agreements with banks of $98.5$156 million, all of which expire in 2009.2010. Approximately $44$41 million of the facilities contain 2-yeartwo-year term loan options and $15 million contain 1-yearone-year term loan options. The Company expects to renew its credit facilities, as needed, prior to expiration.
Subsequent to December 31, 2008, the Company increased an existing credit agreement by $10 million. The facility matures in the third quarter of 2009 and allows for the execution of a two year term loan.
In connection with these credit arrangements, the Company agrees to pay commitment fees based on the unused portions of the commitments or to maintain compensating balances with the banks. Commitment fees average less than 1/84 of 1% for the Company. Compensating balances are not legally restricted from withdrawal.
The credit arrangements contain covenants that limit the ratio of indebtedness to capitalization (each as defined in the arrangements) to 65%. For purposes of these definitions, indebtedness excludes long-term debt payable to affiliated trusts and, in certain cases, other hybrid securities.
In addition, the credit arrangements contain cross default provisions that would trigger an event of default if the Company defaulted on other indebtedness above a specified threshold. At December 31, 2009, the Company was in compliance with all such covenants. None of the arrangements contain material adverse change clauses at the time of borrowing.
This $98.5$156 million in unused credit arrangements provides required liquidity support to the Company’s borrowings through a commercial paper program. At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had $26.3 million outstanding inno commercial paper.paper outstanding. The credit arrangements also provide support to the Company’s variable rate tax-exempt pollution control bonds totaling $40.1 million.
During 2008,2009, the peak amount outstanding for short-term debt was $86.6$66.7 million and the average amount outstanding was $28.1$15.9 million. The average annual interest rate on short-term debt was 0.3% for 2009 and 2.6% for 2008 and 5.3% for 2007.
Financial Instruments
The Company enters into energy-related derivatives to hedge exposures to electricity, gas, and other fuel price changes. However, due to cost-based rate regulations, the Company has limited exposure to market volatility in commodity fuel prices and prices of electricity. The Company manages retail fuel-hedging programs implemented per the guidelines of the Mississippi PSC and wholesale fuel-hedging programs under agreements with wholesale customers. The Company also enters into hedges of forward electricity sales.

II-357


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
At December 31, the net fair value of energy-related derivative contracts by hedge designation was reflected in the financial statements as assets/(liabilities) as follows:
         
  2008 2007
  (in millions)
Regulatory hedges $(52.0) $1.3 
Cash flow hedges     0.9 
Non-accounting hedges     (0.2)
 
Total fair value $(52.0) $2.0 
 
Energy-related derivative contracts which are designated as regulatory hedges relate primarily to the Company’s fuel hedging programs, where gains and losses are initially recorded as regulatory liabilities and assets, respectively, and then are included in fuel expense as they are recovered through the energy cost management clause. Gains and losses on energy-related derivatives designated as cash flow hedges are used to hedge anticipated purchases and sales and are initially deferred in other comprehensive income before being recognized in income in the same period as the hedged transaction. Gains and losses on energy-related derivative contracts that are not designated or fail to qualify as hedges are recognized in the statements of income as incurred. The pre-tax gains (losses) reclassified from other comprehensive income to revenue and fuel expense were not material for any period presented and are not expected to be material for 2009. Additionally, there was no material ineffectiveness recorded in earnings for any period presented. The Company has energy-related hedges in place up to and including 2012.
All derivative financial instruments are recognized as either assets or liabilities and are measured at fair value. See Note 9 for additional information.2008.
7. COMMITMENTS
Construction Program
The Company is engaged in continuous construction programs, currently estimated to total $163 million in 2009, $467$472 million in 2010, $661 million in 2011, and $1.0$1.3 billion in 2011.2012. The construction program is subject to periodic review and revision, and actual construction costs may vary from these estimates because of numerous factors. These factors include: changes in business conditions; revised load growth

II-373


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
estimates; storm impacts; changes in environmental statutes and regulations; changes in FERC rules and regulations; Mississippi PSC approvals; changes in legislation; the cost and efficiency of construction labor, equipment, and materials; project scope and design changes; and the cost of capital. In addition, there can be no assurance that costs related to capital expenditures will be fully recovered. At December 31, 2008,2009, significant purchase commitments were outstanding in connection with the construction program. Capital improvements to generating, transmission, and distribution facilities, including those to meet environmental standards, will continue.
Long-Term Service Agreements
The Company has entered into a Long-Term Service Agreement (LTSA) with General Electric (GE) for the purpose of securing maintenance support for the leased combined cycle units at Plant Daniel. The LTSA provides that GE will cover all planned inspections on the covered equipment, which generally includes the cost of all labor and materials. GE is also obligated to cover the costs of unplanned maintenance on the covered equipment subject to limits and scope specified in the contract.LTSA.
In general, the LTSA is in effect through two major inspection cycles of the units. Scheduled payments to GE under the LTSA, which are subject to price escalation, are made monthly based on estimated operating hours of the units and are recognized as expense based on actual hours of operation. The Company has recognized $13.3 million, $9.4 million, and $9.7 million for 2009, 2008, and $8.4 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively, which is included in maintenance expense in the statements of income. Remaining payments to GE under this agreementthe LTSA are currently estimated to total $137$121 million over the next 1311 years. However, the LTSA contains various cancellation provisions at the option of the Company.
The Company also has entered into a LTSA with Alstom Power, Inc. for the purpose of securing maintenance support for its Chevron Unit 5 combustion turbine plant. In summary, the LTSA stipulates that Alstom Power, Inc. will perform all planned maintenance on the covered equipment, which includes the cost of all labor and materials. Alstom Power, Inc is also obligated to cover the costs of unplanned maintenance on the covered equipment subject to a limit specified in the contract.

II-358


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
LTSA.
In general, this LTSA is in effect through two major inspection cycles. Scheduled payments to Alstom Power, Inc., which are subject to price escalation, are made at various intervals based on actual operating hours of the unit. Payments to Alstom Power, Inc. under this agreementthe LTSA are currently estimated to total $24.1$22.3 million over the remaining term of the agreement,LTSA, which is approximately 9eight years. However, the LTSA contains various cancellation provisions at the option of the Company. Payments made to Alstom Power, Inc. under the LTSA prior to the performance of any planned maintenance are recorded as a prepayment in the balance sheets. Inspection costs are capitalized or charged to expense based on the nature of the work performed. After this contractthe LTSA expires, the Company expects to replace it with a new contract with similar terms.
Fuel Commitments
To supply a portion of the fuel requirements of the generating plants, the Company has entered into various long-term commitments for the procurement of fossil fuel. In most cases, these contracts contain provisions for price escalations, minimum purchase levels, and other financial commitments. Coal commitments include forward contract purchases for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissionemissions allowances. Natural gas purchase commitments contain fixed volumes with prices based on various indices at the time of delivery; amounts included in the chart below represent estimates based on New York Mercantile Exchange future prices at December 31, 2008.2009.
Total estimated minimum long-term obligations at December 31, 2008,2009 were as follows:
                
 Commitments Commitments
 Natural Gas Coal Natural Gas Coal
 (in thousands)     (in thousands)
2009 $191,576 $368,572 
2010 128,270 177,351  $185,120 $316,006 
2011 66,372 121,436  154,004 322,858 
2012 22,326 63,795  97,800 111,226 
2013 22,282 23,005  75,708 23,005 
2014 and thereafter 204,944 7,800 
2014 61,622 7,800 
2015 and thereafter 182,662  
Total $635,770 $761,959  $756,916 $780,895 
Additional commitments for fuel will be required to supply the Company’s future needs.

II-374


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
SCS may enter into various types of wholesale energy and natural gas contracts acting as an agent for the Company and the other traditional operating companies and Southern Power. Under these agreements, each of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power may be jointly and severally liable. The creditworthiness of Southern Power is currently inferior to the creditworthiness of the traditional operating companies. Accordingly, Southern Company has entered into keep-well agreements with the Company and each of the other traditional operating companies to ensure the Company will not subsidize or be responsible for any costs, losses, liabilities, or damages resulting from the inclusion of Southern Power as a contracting party under these agreements.
Operating Leases
Railcar Leases
The Company and Gulf Power have jointly entered into operating lease agreements for the use of 745 aluminum railcars. The Company has the option to purchase the railcars at the greater of lease termination value or fair market value, or to renew the leases at the end of the lease term. The Company also has multiple operating lease agreements for the use of additional railcars that do not contain a purchase option. All of these leases are for the transport of coal to Plant Daniel.
The Company’s share (50%) of the leases, charged to fuel stock and recovered through the fuel cost recovery clause, was $4.0 million in 2008, $4.4 million in 2007, and $4.6 million in 2006. The Company’s annual railcar lease payments for 2009 through 2013 will average approximately $2.2 million and after 2013, lease payments total in aggregate approximately $2.2 million.
In addition to railcar leases, the Company has other operating leases for fuel handling equipment at Plants Daniel and Watson and operating leases for barges and tow/shift boats for the transport of coal at Plant Watson. The Company’s share (50% at Plant Daniel and 100% at Plant Watson) of the leases for fuel handling was charged to fuel handling expense in the amount of $0.6 million in 2008 and $0.9 million in 2007. The Company’s annual lease payments for 2009 through 2011 will average approximately $0.3 million.

II-359


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The Company charged to fuel stock and recovered through fuel cost recovery the barge transportation leases in the amount of $9.8 million in 2008 and $6.2 million in 2007 related to barges and tow/shift boats. The Company’s annual lease payments for 2009, with regards to these barge transportation leases, will be approximately $7.6 million.
Plant Daniel Combined Cycle Generating Units
In May 2001, the Company began the initial 10-year term of the lease agreement for a 1,064 megawatt1,064-MW natural gas combined cycle generating facility built at Plant Daniel (Facility). The lease arrangement provided a lower cost alternative to its cost based rate regulated customers than a traditional rate base asset. See Note 3 under “Retail Regulatory Matters – Performance Evaluation Plan” for a description of the Company’s formulary rate plan.
In 2003, the Facility was acquired by Juniper Capital L.P. (Juniper), whose partners are unaffiliated with the Company. Simultaneously, Juniper entered into a restructured lease agreement with the Company. Juniper has also entered into leases with other parties unrelated to the Company. The assets leased by the Company comprise less than 50% of Juniper’s assets. The Company is not required to consolidate the leased assets and related liabilities, and the lease with Juniper is considered an operating lease. The lease agreement is treated as an operating lease for accounting purposes as well as for both retail and wholesale rate recovery purposes. For income tax purposes, the Company retains tax ownership. The initial lease term ends in 2011 and the lease includes a purchase and renewal option based on the cost of the Facility at the inception of the lease, which was $370 million. The Company is required to amortize approximately 4% of the initial acquisition cost over the initial lease term. EighteenIn April 2010, 18 months prior to the end of the initial lease, the Company must notify Juniper if the lease will be terminated. The Company may elect to renew the lease for 10 years. If the lease is renewed, the agreement calls for the Company to amortize an additional 17% of the initial completion cost over the renewal period. Upon termination of the lease, at the Company’s option, it may either exercise its purchase option or the Facility can be sold to a third party. If the Company does not exercise either its purchase option or its renewal option, the Company could lose its rights to some or all of the 1,064 MWs of capacity at that time.
The lease provides for a residual value guarantee, approximately 73% of the acquisition cost, by the Company that is due upon termination of the lease in the event that the Company does not renew the lease or purchase the Facility and that the fair market value is less than the unamortized cost of the Facility. A liability of approximately $3 million, $5 million, $7 million, and $9$7 million for the fair market value of this residual value guarantee is included in the balance sheets at December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006,2007, respectively. Lease expenses were $26 million, $27$26 million, and $27 million in 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007, respectively.
The Company estimates that its annual amount of future minimum operating lease payments under this arrangement, exclusive of any payment related to the residual value guarantee, as of December 31, 2008,2009, are as follows:
     
  Minimum Lease Payments
  (in thousands)
2009 $28,504 
2010  28,398 
2011  28,291 
2012   
2013   
2014 and thereafter   
 
Total commitments $85,193 
 
     
  Minimum Lease Payments
  (in thousands)
2010 $28,398 
2011  28,291 
2012 and thereafter   
 
Total commitments $56,689 
 
Other Operating Leases
The Company and Gulf Power have jointly entered into operating lease agreements for the use of 745 aluminum railcars. The Company has the option to purchase the railcars at the greater of lease termination value or fair market value, or to renew the leases at the end of the lease term. The Company also has multiple operating lease agreements for the use of additional railcars that do not contain a purchase option. All of these leases are for the transport of coal to Plant Daniel.

II-375


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
The Company’s share (50%) of the leases, charged to fuel stock and recovered through the fuel cost recovery clause, was $4.0 million in 2009, $4.0 million in 2008, and $4.4 million in 2007. The Company’s annual railcar lease payments for 2010 through 2014 will average approximately $1.7 million and after 2014, lease payments total in aggregate approximately $1.6 million.
In addition to railcar leases, the Company has other operating leases for fuel handling equipment at Plants Daniel and Watson and operating leases for barges and tow/shift boats for the transport of coal at Plant Watson. The Company’s share (50% at Plant Daniel and 100% at Plant Watson) of the leases for fuel handling was charged to fuel handling expense in the amount of $0.6 million in 2009 and $0.6 million in 2008. The Company’s annual lease payments for 2010 through 2014 will average approximately $0.3 million for fuel handling equipment. The Company charged to fuel stock and recovered through fuel cost recovery the barge transportation leases in the amount of $8.4 million in 2009 and $9.8 million in 2008 related to barges and tow/shift boats. The Company’s annual lease payments for 2010 through 2014 with respect to these barge transportation leases will average approximately $7.7 million.
8. STOCK OPTION PLAN
Southern Company provides non-qualified stock options to a large segment of the Company’s employees ranging from line management to executives. As of December 31, 2008,2009, there were 273282 current and former employees of the Company participating in the stock option plan and there were 33.221 million shares of Southern Company common stock remaining available for awards under this plan. The prices of options granted to date have been at the fair market value of the shares on the dates of grant. Options granted to date become exercisable pro rata over a maximum period of three years from the date of grant. The Company generally recognizes stock option expense on a straight-line basis over the vesting period which equates to the requisite service period; however, for employees who are eligible for retirement the total cost is expensed at the grant date. Options outstanding will expire no later than 10 years after the date of grant, unless terminated earlier by the Southern Company Board of Directors in accordance with the stock option plan. For certain stock option awards, a change in control will provide accelerated vesting.

II-360


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
The estimated fair values of stock options granted in 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007 were derived using the Black-Scholes stock option pricing model. Expected volatility was based on historical volatility of Southern Company’s stock over a period equal to the expected term. The Company used historical exercise data to estimate the expected term that represents the period of time that options granted to employees are expected to be outstanding. The risk-free rate was based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant that covers the expected term of the stock options. The following table shows the assumptions used in the pricing model and the weighted average grant-date fair value of stock options granted:
                        
Year Ended December 31 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007 
Expected volatility  13.1%  14.8%  16.9%  15.6%  13.1%  14.8%
Expected term(in years)
 5.0 5.0 5.0  5.0 5.0 5.0 
Interest rate  2.8%  4.6%  4.6%  1.9%  2.8%  4.6%
Dividend yield  4.5%  4.3%  4.4%  5.4%  4.5%  4.3%
Weighted average grant-date fair value $2.37 $4.12 $4.15  $1.80 $2.37 $4.12 
The Company’s activity in the stock option plan for 20082009 is summarized below:
                
 Shares Subject Weighted Average Shares Subject Weighted Average
 to Option Exercise Price to Option Exercise Price
Outstanding at December 31, 2007 1,477,954 $30.30 
Outstanding at December 31, 2008 1,431,127 $31.72 
Granted 253,120 35.78  452,956 31.39 
Exercised  (297,599) 28.14   (26,217) 18.64 
Cancelled  (2,348) 25.45   (1,210) 31.21 
Outstanding at December 31, 2008
 1,431,127 $31.72 
Outstanding at December 31, 2009
 1,856,656 $31.83 
Exercisable at December 31, 2008
 937,694 $29.63 
Exercisable at December 31, 2009
 1,153,249 $31.09 
The number of stock options vested, and expected to vest in the future, as of December 31, 2008,2009 was not significantly different from the number of stock options outstanding at December 31, 20082009 as stated above. As of December 31, 2008,2009, the weighted average remaining contractual termsterm for the options outstanding and options exercisable was 6.26.3 years and 5.14.8 years, respectively, and the aggregate intrinsic valuesvalue for the options outstanding and options exercisable was $7.6$4.3 million and $6.9$3.4 million, respectively.

II-376


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
As of December 31, 2008,2009, there was $0.2 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to stock option awards not yet vested. That cost is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 810 months.
For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007 and 2006,2007, total compensation cost for stock option awards recognized in income was $0.9 million, $0.7 million, $1.0 million and $1.1$1.0 million, respectively, with the related tax benefit also recognized in income of $0.3 million, $0.4$0.3 million, and $0.4 million, respectively.
The compensation cost and tax benefits related to the grant and exercise of Southern Company stock options to the Company’s employees are recognized in the Company’s financial statements with a corresponding credit to equity, representing a capital contribution from Southern Company.
The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007 and 2006, was $0.4 million, $3.7 million, $2.2 million, and $2.4$2.2 million, respectively. The actual tax benefit realized by the Company for the tax deductions from stock option exercises totaled $1.4$0.2 million, $0.9$1.4 million, and $0.9 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006.2007.
9. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
On January 1, 2008, the Company adopted FASB Statement No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (SFAS No. 157) which defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value, and requires additional disclosures about fair value measurements. The criterion that is set forth in SFAS No. 157 is applicable to fair value measurement where it is permitted or required under other accounting pronouncements.
SFAS No. 157 defines fair value as the exit price, which is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The fair value measurement is based on inputs of observable and unobservable market data that a market participant would use in pricing the asset or liability. The use of

II-361


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2008 Annual Report
observable inputs is maximized where available and the use of unobservable inputs is minimized for fair value measurement. As a means to illustrate the inputs used, SFAS No. 157 establishesmeasurement and reflects a three-tier fair value hierarchy that prioritizes inputs to valuation techniques used for fair value measurement.
Level 1 consists of observable market data in an active market for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2 consists of observable market data, other than that included in Level 1, that is either directly or indirectly observable.
Level 3 consists of unobservable market data. The input may reflect the assumptions of the Company of what a market participant would use in pricing an asset or liability. If there is little available market data, then the Company’s own assumptions are the best available information.
Level 1 consists of observable market data in an active market for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2 consists of observable market data, other than that included in Level 1, that is either directly or indirectly observable.
Level 3 consists of unobservable market data. The input may reflect the assumptions of the Company of what a market participant would use in pricing an asset or liability. If there is little available market data, then the Company’s own assumptions are the best available information.
In the case of multiple inputs being used in a fair value measurement, the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement represents the level in the fair value hierarchy in which the fair value measurement is reported.
The adoption of SFAS No. 157 has not resulted in any significant changes to the methodologies used for fair value measurement. Primarily all the changes in the fair value of assets and liabilities are recorded in other comprehensive income or regulatory assets and liabilities, and thus the impact on earnings is limited to derivatives that do not qualify for hedge accounting.
The fair value measurements performed on a recurring basis and the level of the fair value hierarchy in which they fall at December 31, 20082009 are as follows:
                                
At December 31, 2008: Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total
 Fair Value Measurements Using
 Quoted Prices       
 in Active Significant     
 Markets for Other Significant   
 Identical Observable Unobservable   
 Assets Inputs Inputs   
At December 31, 2009: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total 
 (in millions)                 (in thousands) 
Assets:  
Energy-related derivatives $ $1.3  $1.3  $ $563 $ $563 
Cash equivalents 18.5   18.5  60,000   60,000 
Total fair value $18.5 $1.3  $19.8 
Total $60,000 $563 $ $60,563 
  
Liabilities:  
Energy-related derivatives total fair value $ $53.3  $53.3 
Energy-related derivatives $ $42,297 $ $42,297 
Energy-related derivatives primarily consist of over-the-counter contracts. See Note 6 under “Financial Instruments”10 for additional information. The cash equivalents consist of securities with original maturities of 90 days or less. All of these financial instruments and investments are valued primarily using the market approach.

II-377


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
As of December 31, 2009, the fair value measurements of investments calculated at net asset value per share (or its equivalent), as well as the nature and risks of those investments, are as follows:
           
      Unfunded Redemption Redemption
As of December 31, 2009: Fair Value Commitments Frequency Notice Period
  (in thousands)      
Cash equivalents:          
Money market funds $60,000  None Daily Not applicable
The money market funds are short-term investments of excess funds in various money market mutual funds, which are portfolios of short-term debt securities. The money market funds are regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission, and typically receive the highest rating from credit rating agencies. Regulatory and rating agency requirements for money market funds include minimum credit ratings and maximum maturities for individual securities and a maximum weighted average portfolio maturity. Redemptions are available on a same day basis, up to the full amount of the Company’s investment in the money market funds.
As of December 31, 2009, other financial instruments for which the carrying amount did not equal fair value were as follows:
         
  Carrying Amount Fair Value
  (in thousands)
Long-term debt:        
2009
 $491,410  $497,933 
2008 $407,061  $405,957 
The fair values were based on either closing market prices (Level 1) or closing prices of comparable instruments (Level 2).
10. DERIVATIVES
The Company is exposed to market risks, primarily commodity price risk and interest rate risk. To manage the volatility attributable to these exposures, the Company nets its exposures, where possible, to take advantage of natural offsets and enters into various derivative transactions for the remaining exposures pursuant to the Company’s policies in areas such as counterparty exposure and risk management practices. The Company’s policy is that derivatives are to be used primarily for hedging purposes and mandates strict adherence to all applicable risk management policies. Derivative positions are monitored using techniques including, but not limited to, market valuation, value at risk, stress testing, and sensitivity analysis. Derivative instruments are recognized at fair value in the balance sheets as either assets or liabilities.
Energy-Related Derivatives
The Company enters into energy-related derivatives to hedge exposures to electricity, gas, and other fuel price changes. However, due to cost-based rate regulations, the Company has limited exposure to market volatility in commodity fuel prices and prices of electricity. The Company manages fuel-hedging programs, implemented per the guidelines of the Mississippi PSC, through the use of financial derivative contracts.
To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in electricity prices, the Company enters into physical fixed-price or heat rate contracts for the purchase and sale of electricity through the wholesale electricity market. To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in gas prices, the Company may enter into fixed-price contracts for natural gas purchases; however, a significant portion of contracts are priced at market.
Energy-related derivative contracts are accounted for in one of three methods:
Regulatory Hedges– Energy-related derivative contracts which are designated as regulatory hedges relate primarily to the Company’s fuel hedging programs, where gains and losses are initially recorded as regulatory liabilities and assets, respectively, and then are included in fuel expense as the underlying fuel is used in operations and ultimately recovered through the respective fuel cost recovery clauses.
Cash Flow Hedges– Gains and losses on energy-related derivatives designated as cash flow hedges, are used to hedge anticipated purchases and sales and are initially deferred in other comprehensive income (OCI) before being recognized in income in the same period as the hedged transactions are reflected in earnings.

II-378


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
Not Designated– Gains and losses on energy-related derivative contracts that are not designated or fail to qualify as hedges are recognized in the statements of income as incurred.
Some energy-related derivative contracts require physical delivery as opposed to financial settlement, and this type of derivative is both common and prevalent within the electric industry. When an energy-related derivative contract is settled physically, any cumulative unrealized gain or loss is reversed and the contract price is recognized in the respective line item representing the actual price of the underlying goods being delivered.
At December 31, 2009, the net volume of energy-related derivative contracts for natural gas positions for the Company, together with the longest hedge date over which it is hedging its exposure to the variability in future cash flows for forecasted transactions and the longest date for derivatives not designated as hedges, were as follows:
     
Net Purchased Longest Hedge Longest Non-Hedge
mmBtu* Date Date
(in thousands)    
24,000 2014 
*mmBtu — million British thermal units
For cash flow hedges, the amounts expected to be reclassified from OCI to revenue and fuel expense for the next 12-month period ending December 31, 2010 are immaterial.
Derivative Financial Statement Presentation and Amounts
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the fair value of energy-related derivatives was reflected in the balance sheets as follows:
                     
  Asset Derivatives Liability Derivatives
  Balance Sheet         Balance Sheet    
Derivative Category Location 2009 2008 Location 2009 2008
    (in thousands)   (in thousands)
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments for regulatory purposes
                    
Energy-related derivatives: Other current
assets
 $446  $761  Liabilities from risk
management activities
 $19,454  $28,660 
  Other deferred
charges and assets
  105     Other deferred credits
and liabilities
  22,843   24,057 
 
Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments for regulatory purposes
   $551  $761    $42,297  $52,717 
 
                     
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments in cash flow hedges
                    
Energy-related derivatives: Other current
assets
 $  $159  Liabilities from risk management activities $  $17 
 
                     
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments
                    
Energy-related derivatives: Other current
assets
 $12  $443  Liabilities from risk management activities $  $614 
 
                     
Total
   $563  $1,363    $42,297  $53,348 
 
All derivative instruments are measured at fair value. See Note 9 for additional information.

II-379


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the pre-tax effect of unrealized derivative gains (losses) arising from energy-related derivative instruments designated as regulatory hedging instruments and deferred on the balance sheets were as follows:
                       
  Unrealized Losses Unrealized Gains
  Balance Sheet         Balance Sheet    
Derivative Category Location 2009 2008 Location 2009 2008
      (in thousands)   (in thousands)
Energy-related derivatives: Other regulatory
assets, current
 $(19,454) $(28,660) Other regulatory
liabilities, current
 $446  $761 
  Other regulatory
assets, deferred
  (22,843)  (24,057) Other regulatory
liabilities, deferred
  105    
 
Total energy-related derivative gains (losses)
     $(42,297) $(52,717)   $551  $761 
 
For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, the pre-tax effect of energy-related derivatives designated as cash flow hedging instruments on the statements of income were as follows:
                              
  Gain (Loss) Recognized in Gain (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated OCI into Income
Derivatives in Cash Flow OCI on Derivative (Effective Portion)
Hedging Relationships (Effective Portion)   Amount
Derivative Category 2009 2008 2007 Statements of Income Location2009 2008 2007
  (in thousands)   (in thousands)
Energy-related derivatives $  $(929) $(41) Fuel $  $  $ 
There was no material ineffectiveness recorded in earnings for any period presented.
For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, the pre-tax effect of energy-related derivatives not designated as hedging instruments on the statements of income were immaterial.
Contingent Features
The Company does not have any credit arrangements that would require material changes in payment schedules or terminations as a result of a credit rating downgrade. There are certain derivatives that could require collateral, but not accelerated payment, in the event of various credit rating changes of certain affiliated companies. At December 31, 2009, the fair value of derivative liabilities with contingent features was $3.9 million.
At December 31, 2009, the Company had no collateral posted with its derivative counterparties; however, because of the joint and several liability features underlying these derivatives, the maximum potential collateral requirements arising from the credit-risk-related contingent features, at a rating below BBB- and/or Baa3, is $33.3 million.
Currently, the Company has investment grade credit ratings from the major rating agencies with respect to debt and preferred stock.
Generally, collateral may be provided by a Southern Company guaranty, letter of credit, or cash. The Company participated in certain agreements that could require collateral in the event that one or more Southern Company system power pool participants has a credit rating change to below investment grade.

II-380


NOTES (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 2009 Annual Report
11. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL INFORMATION (UNAUDITED)
Summarized quarterly financial data for 20082009 and 20072008 are as follows:
                        
 Operating Operating Net Income After Dividends Operating Operating Net Income After Dividends
Quarter Ended Revenues Income On Preferred Stock Revenues Income on Preferred Stock
     (in thousands) 
March 2009
 $268,723 $31,418 $17,971 
June 2009
 286,681 40,899 21,933 
September 2009
 330,680 63,075 34,898 
December 2009
 263,337 20,665 10,165 
 (in thousands) 
March 2008
 $285,416 $28,712 $16,172  $285,416 $28,712 $16,172 
June 2008
 297,932 39,410 24,005  297,932 39,410 24,005 
September 2008
 381,415 58,718 36,217  381,415 58,718 36,217 
December 2008
 291,779 20,488 9,566  291,779 20,488 9,566 
 
March 2007 $256,826 $36,824 $19,636 
June 2007 273,216 41,671 26,280 
September 2007 333,023 59,535 34,450 
December 2007 250,679 9,707 3,665 
The Company’s business is influenced by seasonal weather conditions.

II-362II-381


SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA 2004-20082005-2009
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                    
                    
 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004  2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 
Operating Revenues (in thousands)
 $1,256,542 $1,113,744 $1,009,237 $969,733 $910,326  $1,149,421 $1,256,542 $1,113,744 $1,009,237 $969,733 
Net Income after Dividends on Preferred Stock (in thousands)
 $85,960 $84,031 $82,010 $73,808 $76,801 
Cash Dividends on Common Stock (in thousands)
 $68,400 $67,300 $65,200 $62,000 $66,200 
Net Income after Dividends
 
on Preferred Stock (in thousands)
 $84,967 $85,960 $84,031 $82,010 $73,808 
Cash Dividends
 
on Common Stock (in thousands)
 $68,500 $68,400 $67,300 $65,200 $62,000 
Return on Average Common Equity (percent)
 13.75 13.96 14.25 13.33 14.24  13.12 13.75 13.96 14.25 13.33 
Total Assets (in thousands)
 $1,952,695 $1,727,665 $1,708,376 $1,981,269 $1,479,113  $2,072,681 $1,952,695 $1,727,665 $1,708,376 $1,981,269 
Gross Property Additions (in thousands)
 $139,250 $114,927 $127,290 $158,084 $70,063  $95,573 $139,250 $114,927 $127,290 $158,084 
Capitalization (in thousands):
  
Common stock equity $636,451 $613,830 $589,820 $561,160 $545,837  $658,522 $636,451 $613,830 $589,820 $561,160 
Preferred stock 32,780 32,780 32,780 32,780 32,780 
Redeemable preferred stock 32,780 32,780 32,780 32,780 32,780 
Long-term debt 370,460 281,963 278,635 278,630 278,580  493,480 370,460 281,963 278,635 278,630 
Total (excluding amounts due within one year) $1,039,691 $928,573 $901,235 $872,570 $857,197  $1,184,782 $1,039,691 $928,573 $901,235 $872,570 
Capitalization Ratios (percent):
  
Common stock equity 61.2 66.1 65.4 64.3 63.7  55.6 61.2 66.1 65.4 64.3 
Preferred stock 3.2 3.5 3.6 3.8 3.8 
Redeemable preferred stock 2.8 3.2 3.5 3.6 3.8 
Long-term debt 35.6 30.4 31.0 31.9 32.5  41.6 35.6 30.4 31.0 31.9 
Total (excluding amounts due within one year) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0  100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 
Security Ratings:
  
First Mortgage Bonds —  
Moody’s     Aa3       
Standard and Poor’s     A+       
Fitch     AA       
Preferred Stock —  
Moody’s A3 A3 A3 A3 A3  A3 A3 A3 A3 A3 
Standard and Poor’s BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+  BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+
Fitch A+ A+ A+ A+ A+  A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ 
Unsecured Long-Term Debt —  
Moody’s A1 A1 A1 A1 A1  A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 
Standard and Poor’s A A A A A  A A A A A 
Fitch AA- AA- AA- AA- AA-  AA- AA- AA- AA- AA- 
Customers (year-end):
  
Residential 152,280 150,601 147,643 142,077 160,189  151,375 152,280 150,601 147,643 142,077 
Commercial 33,589 33,507 32,958 30,895 33,646  33,147 33,589 33,507 32,958 30,895 
Industrial 518 514 507 512 522  513 518 514 507 512 
Other 183 181 177 176 183  180 183 181 177 176 
Total 186,570 184,803 181,285 173,660 194,540  185,215 186,570 184,803 181,285 173,660 
Employees (year-end)
 1,317 1,299 1,270 1,254 1,283  1,285 1,317 1,299 1,270 1,254 

II-363II-382


SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA 2004-20082005-2009 (continued)
Mississippi Power Company 20082009 Annual Report
                    
                    
 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004  2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 
Operating Revenues (in thousands):
  
Residential $248,693 $230,819 $214,472 $209,546 $199,242  $245,357 $248,693 $230,819 $214,472 $209,546 
Commercial 271,452 247,539 215,451 213,093 199,127  269,423 271,452 247,539 215,451 213,093 
Industrial 258,328 242,436 211,451 190,720 180,516  269,128 258,328 242,436 211,451 190,720 
Other 6,961 6,420 5,812 5,501 5,428  7,041 6,961 6,420 5,812 5,501 
Total retail 785,434 727,214 647,186 618,860 584,313  790,949 785,434 727,214 647,186 618,860 
Wholesale — non-affiliates 353,793 323,120 268,850 283,413 265,863  299,268 353,793 323,120 268,850 283,413 
Wholesale — affiliates 100,928 46,169 76,439 50,460 44,371  44,546 100,928 46,169 76,439 50,460 
Total revenues from sales of electricity 1,240,155 1,096,503 992,475 952,733 894,547  1,134,763 1,240,155 1,096,503 992,475 952,733 
Other revenues 16,387 17,241 16,762 17,000 15,779  14,658 16,387 17,241 16,762 17,000 
Total $1,256,542 $1,113,744 $1,009,237 $969,733 $910,326  $1,149,421 $1,256,542 $1,113,744 $1,009,237 $969,733 
Kilowatt-Hour Sales (in thousands):
  
Residential 2,121,389 2,134,883 2,118,106 2,179,756 2,297,110  2,091,825 2,121,389 2,134,883 2,118,106 2,179,756 
Commercial 2,856,744 2,876,247 2,675,945 2,725,274 2,969,829  2,851,248 2,856,744 2,876,247 2,675,945 2,725,274 
Industrial 4,187,101 4,317,656 4,142,947 3,798,477 4,235,290  4,329,924 4,187,101 4,317,656 4,142,947 3,798,477 
Other 38,886 38,764 36,959 37,905 40,229  38,855 38,886 38,764 36,959 37,905 
Total retail 9,204,120 9,367,550 8,973,957 8,741,412 9,542,458  9,311,852 9,204,120 9,367,550 8,973,957 8,741,412 
Sales for resale — non-affiliates 5,016,655 5,185,772 4,624,092 4,811,250 6,027,666 
Sales for resale — affiliates 1,487,083 1,026,546 1,679,831 896,361 1,053,471 
Wholesale — non-affiliates 4,651,606 5,016,655 5,185,772 4,624,092 4,811,250 
Wholesale — affiliates 839,372 1,487,083 1,026,546 1,679,831 896,361 
Total 15,707,858 15,579,868 15,277,880 14,449,023 16,623,595  14,802,830 15,707,858 15,579,868 15,277,880 14,449,023 
Average Revenue Per Kilowatt-Hour (cents):
  
Residential 11.72 10.81 10.13 9.61 8.67  11.73 11.72 10.81 10.13 9.61 
Commercial 9.50 8.61 8.05 7.82 6.70  9.45 9.50 8.61 8.05 7.82 
Industrial 6.17 5.61 5.10 5.02 4.26  6.22 6.17 5.61 5.10 5.02 
Total retail 8.53 7.76 7.21 7.08 6.12  8.49 8.53 7.76 7.21 7.08 
Wholesale 6.99 5.94 5.48 5.85 4.38  6.26 6.99 5.94 5.48 5.85 
Total sales 7.90 7.04 6.50 6.59 5.38  7.67 7.90 7.04 6.50 6.59 
Residential Average Annual Kilowatt-Hour Use Per Customer
 13,992 14,294 14,480 14,111 14,357  13,762 13,992 14,294 14,480 14,111 
Residential Average Annual Revenue Per Customer
 $1,640 $1,545 $1,466 $1,357 $1,245  $1,614 $1,640 $1,545 $1,466 $1,357 
Plant Nameplate Capacity Ratings (year-end) (megawatts)
 3,156 3,156 3,156 3,156 3,156  3,156 3,156 3,156 3,156 3,156 
Maximum Peak-Hour Demand (megawatts):
  
Winter 2,385 2,294 2,204 2,178 2,173  2,392 2,385 2,294 2,204 2,178 
Summer 2,458 2,512 2,390 2,493 2,427  2,522 2,458 2,512 2,390 2,493 
Annual Load Factor (percent)
 61.5 60.9 61.3 56.6 62.4  60.7 61.5 60.9 61.3 56.6 
Plant Availability Fossil-Steam (percent)
 91.6 92.2 81.1 82.8 91.4  94.1 91.6 92.2 81.1 82.8 
Source of Energy Supply (percent):
  
Coal 58.7 60.0 63.1 58.1 55.7  40.0 58.7 60.0 63.1 58.1 
Oil and gas 28.6 27.1 26.1 24.4 25.5  43.6 28.6 27.1 26.1 24.4 
Purchased power —  
From non-affiliates 4.4 3.0 3.5 5.1 6.4  3.3 4.4 3.0 3.5 5.1 
From affiliates 8.3 9.9 7.3 12.4 12.4  13.1 8.3 9.9 7.3 12.4 
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0  100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

II-364II-383


SOUTHERN POWER COMPANY
FINANCIAL SECTION

II-365II-384


MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
The management of Southern Power Company (the “Company”) is responsible for establishing and maintaining an adequate system of internal control over financial reporting as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). A control system can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.
Under management’s supervision, an evaluation of the design and effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was conducted based on the framework inInternal Control—Integrated Frameworkissued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this evaluation, management concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2008.2009.
This Annual Report does not include an attestation report of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation by the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit the Company to provide only management’s report in this Annual Report.
/s/ Ronnie L. Bates

Ronnie L. Bates
President and Chief Executive Officer
/s/ Michael W. Southern

Michael W. Southern
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
February 25, 20092010

II-366II-385


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Southern Power Company
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies (the “Company”) (a wholly owned subsidiary of Southern Company) as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, and the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, common stockholder’s equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008.2009. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements (pages II-387II-407 to II-405)II-428) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008,2009, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
February 25, 20092010

II-367II-386


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
OVERVIEW
Business Activities
Southern Power Company and its wholly-owned subsidiaries (the Company) construct, acquire, own, and manage generation assets and sell electricity at market-based prices in the wholesale market. The Company continues to execute its strategy through a combination of acquiring and constructing new power plants and by entering into power purchase agreements (PPAs) with investor owned utilities, independent power producers, municipalities, and electric cooperatives.
In June 2008,October 2009, the Company completed constructionacquired all of Plant Franklin Unit 3,the outstanding membership interests of Nacogdoches Power LLC (Nacogdoches) from American Renewables, LLC, the developer of the project. The Company is constructing a combined cycle unit located in Smiths, Alabamabiomass generating plant near Sacul, Texas with a nameplatean estimated capacity of 659100 megawatts (MW)(MWs). The Company has a PPA coveringgenerating plant will be fueled from wood waste. Construction commenced in late 2009 and the entireplant is expected to begin commercial operation in 2012. The output of this unit from January 2009 through December 2015.the plant will be sold under a long-term PPA.
In December 2008,2009, the Company announced that it will buildacquired all of the outstanding membership interests of West Georgia Generating Company, LLC (West Georgia) from Broadway Gen Funding, LLC (Broadway), an affiliate of LS Power. West Georgia was merged into the Company and the Company now owns a 669-MW nameplate capacity generating facility consisting of four combustion turbine natural gas generating units with oil back-up. The output from two units is sold under long-term PPAs.
In December 2009, the Company transferred all of the outstanding membership interests of DeSoto County Generating Company LLC (DeSoto) to Broadway as part of the acquisition of West Georgia.
The Company continued construction of an electric generating plant in Cleveland County, North Carolina. This plant will consist of four combustion turbine natural gas generating units with a total expected generating capacity of 720 MW.MWs. The units are expected to go intobegin commercial operation in 2012. The Company alsohas entered into long-term PPAs for 540 MWMWs of the generating capacity of the plant.
As of December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had units totaling 7,555 MW7,880 MWs nameplate capacity in commercial operation. The weighted average duration of the Company’s wholesale contracts exceeds 13.311.7 years, which reduces remarketing risk. The Company’s future earnings will depend on the parameters of the wholesale market federal regulation, and the efficient operation of its wholesale generating assets. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “FERC Matters” herein for additional information.
Key Performance Indicators
To evaluate operating results and to ensure the Company’s ability to meet its contractual commitments to customers, the Company focuses on several key performance indicators. These indicators include plant availability, peak season equivalent forced outage rate (EFOR), return on invested capital (ROIC), and net income. Plant availability measures the percentage of time during the year that the Company’s generating units are available to be called upon to generate (the higher the better), whereas the EFOR more narrowly defines the hours during peak demand times when the Company’s generating units are not available due to forced outages (the lower the better). ROIC is focused on earning a return on all invested capital that meets or exceeds the Company��s weighted average cost of capital. Net income is the primary componentmeasure of the Company’s contribution to Southern Company’s earnings per share goal.financial performance. The Company’s actual performance in 20082009 met or surpassed targets in these key performance areas. See RESULTS OF OPERATIONS herein for additional information on the Company’s financial performance.
Earnings
The Company’s 2009 net income was $155.9 million, an $11.5 million increase over 2008. This increase was primarily due to increased margins associated with the operation of Plant Franklin Unit 3 for all of 2009, increased generation from the Company’s combined cycle units due to lower natural gas prices, and profit recognized under a construction contract with the Orlando Utilities Commission (OUC) whereby the Company provided engineering, procurement, and construction services to build a combined cycle unit for the OUC. These favorable impacts were partially offset by a loss recognized on the transfer of DeSoto to Broadway in December 2009, gains recognized in income in 2008 earnings wererelated to the sale of an undeveloped tract of land in Orange County, Florida to the OUC, and the receipt of a fee for participating in an asset auction as an unsuccessful bidder. Additionally, depreciation increased due to the completion of Plant Franklin Unit 3 in June 2008 and an increase in depreciation rates. Interest expense increased due to a reduction of capitalized interest as a result of the completion of Plant Franklin Unit 3 in June 2008.

II-387


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
The Company’s 2008 net income was $144.4 million, a $12.7 million increase over 2007. This increase was primarily the result ofdue to increased capacity sales to requirements service customers, market sales of uncontracted generating capacity, a gain on the sale of an undeveloped tract of land in 2008, a loss on the gasifier portion of the Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycleintegrated coal gasification combined cycle (IGCC) project in 2007, and the receipt of a fee for participating in an asset auction in 2008. The Company was not the successful bidder in the asset auction.2008 as an unsuccessful bidder. These increases were partially offset by transmission service expenses and tariff penalties incurred in 2008, timing of plant maintenance activities, increased general and administrative expenses associated with the implementation of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) separation order, and increased depreciation associated with Plant Oleander Unit 5 and Plant Franklin Unit 3 being placed into commercial operation in December 2007 and June 2008, respectively.
The Company’s 2007 earnings werenet income was $131.6 million, a $7.2 million increase over 2006. This increase was primarily the result ofdue to increased energy sales due to more favorable weather in 2007. Also contributing to the increase were additional sales from the acquisition of Plant Rowan in September 2006. These increases were partially offset by the $10.7 million after tax loss as a result of the termination of the construction of the gasifier portion of the IGCC project.
The Company’s 2006 earnings were $124.4 million, a $9.7 million increase over 2005. This increase was primarily the result of new PPAs started or acquired in the period, including contracts with Piedmont Municipal Power Authority (PMPA) and EnergyUnited Electric Membership Corporation (EnergyUnited) and the PPAs related to the acquisition of Plants DeSoto and Rowan in June 2006 and September 2006, respectively. Short-term energy sales and increased sales from existing resources also contributed to this increase.

II-368


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
A condensed statement of income follows:
                
                 Increase (Decrease)
 Increase (Decrease) Amount from Prior Year
 Amount from Prior Year 2009 2009 2008 2007
 2008 2008 2007 2006 (in millions)
 (in millions)
Operating revenues $1,313.6 $341.5 $195.0 $(4.0) $946.7 $(366.9) $341.5 $195.0 
Fuel 424.8 186.1 93.4  (63.8) 232.5  (192.3) 186.1 93.4 
Purchased power 328.0 128.1 29.3 10.7  143.9  (184.0) 128.1 29.3 
Other operations and maintenance 147.7 12.7 39.7 14.5  136.7  (11.1) 12.7 39.7 
Loss (gain) on sale of property 5.0 11.0  (6.0)  
Loss on IGCC project   (17.6) 17.6      (17.6) 17.6 
Gain on sale of property  (6.0)  (6.0)   
Depreciation and amortization 88.5 14.5 8.0 11.7  98.1 9.6 14.5 8.0 
Taxes other than income taxes 17.7 2.0 0.2 2.3  16.9  (0.8) 2.0 0.2 
Total operating expenses 1,000.7 319.8 188.2  (24.6) 633.1  (367.6) 319.8 188.2 
Operating income 312.9 21.7 6.8 20.6  313.6 0.7 21.7 6.8 
Other income, net 7.6 4.3 1.1  (0.2)
Interest expense 83.2 4.0  (1.0) 0.8  85.0 1.8 4.0  (1.0)
Profit recognized on construction contract 13.3 13.3   
Other income (expense), net  (0.4)  (8.0) 4.3 1.1 
Income taxes 92.9 9.3 1.7 9.9  85.6  (7.3) 9.3 1.7 
Net Income $144.4 $12.7 $7.2 $9.7 
Net income $155.9 $11.5 $12.7 $7.2 
Operating Revenues
Operating revenues in 2009 were $946.7 million, a $366.9 million (27.9%) decrease from 2008. This decrease was primarily due to lower natural gas prices that reduced energy revenues. This decrease was partially offset by increased capacity and energy revenues from the operation of Plant Franklin Unit 3 and a PPA relating to four units at Plant Dahlberg that began in June 2009.
Operating revenues in 2008 were $1.31 billion, a $341.5 million (35.1%) increase from 2007. This increase was primarily due to increased short-term energy revenues from uncontracted generating units, increased energy revenues due to higher natural gas prices, and increased revenues from a full year of operations at Plant Oleander Unit 5. These increases were partially offset by decreased demand under existing PPAs due to less favorable weather in 2008 compared to 2007. The increase in fuel revenues was accompanied by an increase in related fuel costs and did not have a significant impact on net income.
Operating revenues in 2007 were $972 million, a $195.0 million (25.1%) increase from 2006. This increase was primarily due to increased short-term energy sales, a full year of operations at Plant Rowan acquired in September 2006, new sales with EnergyUnited Electric Membership Cooperative (EnergyUnited), increased demand under existing PPAs with affiliates as a result of favorable weather within the Southern Company system service territory, and higher fuel revenues due to an increase in natural gas prices in 2007. The increase in fuel revenues was accompanied by an increase in related fuel costs and did not have a significant impact on net income.

II-388


Operating revenues in 2006 were $777.0 million, a $4.0 million (0.5%) decrease from 2005. This decrease was primarily due to reduced energy revenues as a result of lower natural gas prices. This reduction was accompanied by a reduction in related fuel costs
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and did not have a significant net income impact. Offsetting this energy-related reduction were increased sales from a full year of operations at Plant Oleander and new sales under PPAs with PMPA and EnergyUnited and those PPAs acquired in the DeSoto and Rowan acquisitions. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “Power Sales Agreements” herein and Note 2 to the financial statements under “DeSoto and Rowan Acquisitions” for additional information.Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Capacity revenues are an integral component of the Company’s PPAs with both affiliate and non-affiliate customers and represent the greatest contribution to net income. Energy under the PPAs is generally sold at variable cost or is indexed to published gas indices. Energy revenues also include fees for support services, fuel storage, and unit start charges. Details of these PPA capacity and energy revenues are as follows:

II-369


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
             
  2009 2008 2007
  (in millions)
 
Capacity revenues —
            
Affiliates $287.6  $279.2  $279.7 
Non-affiliates  185.7   165.2   136.9 
 
Total  473.3   444.4   416.6 
 
Energy revenues —
            
Affiliates  192.8   263.6   227.1 
Non-affiliates  173.8   249.0   189.1 
 
Total  366.6   512.6   416.2 
 
Total PPA revenues
 $839.9  $957.0  $832.8 
 
             
  2008 2007 2006
  (in millions)
             
Capacity revenues —
            
Affiliates $279.2  $279.7  $279.1 
Non-Affiliates  165.2   136.9   103.3 
 
Total  444.4   416.6   382.4 
 
Energy revenues —
            
Affiliates  263.6   227.1   190.1 
Non-Affiliates  249.0   189.1   144.9 
 
Total  512.6   416.2   335.0 
 
Total PPA revenues
 $957.0  $832.8  $717.4 
 
Wholesale revenues that were not covered by PPAs totaled $98.9 million in 2009, which included $64.0 million of revenues from affiliated companies. Wholesale revenues that were not covered by PPAs totaled $349.2 million in 2008, which included $95.5 million of revenues from affiliated companies. Wholesale revenues that were not covered by PPAs totaled $131.0 million in 2007, which included $40.0 million of revenues from affiliated companies. These wholesale sales were made in accordance with the Intercompany Interchange Contract (IIC), as approved by the FERC. These non-PPA wholesale revenues will vary from year to year depending on demand and the availability and cost of generating resources at each company that participates in the centralized operation and dispatch of the Southern Company system fleet of generating plants (Southern Pool)(power pool).
Fuel and Purchased Power Expenses
Fuel costs constitute the single largest expense for the Company. Additionally, the Company purchases a portion of its electricity needs from the wholesale market.
Details of the Company’s fuel and purchased power expenditures are as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
Fuel $424.8 $238.7 $145.2  $232.5 $424.8 $238.7 
Purchased power-non-affiliates 132.2 64.6 53.8  79.3 132.2 64.6 
Purchased power-affiliates 195.8 135.3 116.9  64.6 195.8 135.3 
Total fuel and purchased power expenses $752.8 $438.6 $315.9  $376.4 $752.8 $438.6 
In 2009, total fuel and purchased power expenses decreased by $376.4 million (50.0%) compared to 2008. This decrease was driven by a 56.0% decrease in the average cost of natural gas and a 41.3% decrease in the average cost of purchased power. Additionally, purchased power volume decreased 25.2% primarily due to increased generation at the Company’s combined cycle units as a result of lower natural gas prices. These decreases were partially offset by a 31.2% increase in generation at the Company’s combined cycle units as a result of lower natural gas prices. In 2008, total fuel and purchased power expenses increased by $314.2 million (71.6%) compared to 2007. This increase was driven by a 58.9% increase in generation due to operations at Plant Franklin Unit 3, an 11.9% increase in the average cost of natural gas, and a 107.9% increase in the average cost of purchased power. In 2007, total fuel and purchased power expenses increased by $122.7 million (38.8%) compared to 2006. This increase was driven by a 43.7% increase in generation at Plants Wansley and Dahlberg, a 5.2% increase in the average cost of natural gas, increased purchases of lower cost energy resources from the power pool and non-affiliates, and contracts with Georgia Electric Membership Corporations and Dalton Utilities.
In 2009, fuel expense decreased by $192.3 million (45.3%) compared to 2008. This decrease was driven by a 56.0% decrease in the average cost of natural gas. This decrease was partially offset by a 31.2% increase in generation at the Company’s combined cycle units as a result of lower natural gas prices. In 2008, fuel expense increased by $186.1 million (78.0%) compared to 2007. This increase was driven by a 58.9% increase in generation primarily due to operations at Plant Franklin Unit 3 and aan 11.9% increase in the average cost of natural gas.
In 2007, fuel expense increased by $93.4 million (64.3%) compared to 2006. This increase was driven by a 43.7% increase in generation at Plants Wansley and Dahlberg and a 5.2% increase in the average cost of natural gas.

II-389


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
In 2006, fuel2009, purchased power expense decreased by $63.8$184.0 million (30.5%(56.1%) compared to 2005. This2008, primarily due to a 41.3% decrease was driven by a 25.4% reduction in the average cost of natural gas. Gas pricespurchased power. Additionally, purchased power volume in 2006 were lower and had less weather-driven volatility than the previous year. The fuel price decrease was partially offset by volume increases primarily from2009 decreased 25.2% due to increased generation at Plants Wansley and Dahlberg.
Demand for natural gas in the United States increased in 2007 and the first half of 2008. However, natural gas supplies have increased in the last half of 2008Company’s combined cycle units as a result of lower natural gas prices. Purchased power expense increased production and higher storage levels$128.1 million (64.1%) in 2008 when compared to 2007, primarily due to weak industrial demand. Natural gas prices moderateda 107.9% increase in the second halfaverage cost of 2008 aspurchased power. Purchased power expense increased $29.3 million (17.1%) in 2007 when compared to 2006, primarily due to increased purchases of lower cost energy resources from the result of a recessionary economy. power pool and non-affiliates and contracts with Georgia Electric Membership Corporation and Dalton Utilities.
The Company’s PPAs generally provide that the purchasers are responsible for substantially all of the cost of fuel. Consequently, any increase or decrease in fuel costs is accompanied by an increase or decrease in related fuel revenues and does not have a significant impact on net income.
Purchased power expense increased $128.1 million (64.1%) in 2008 when compared to 2007, primarily due to a 107.9% increase in The Company is responsible for the average cost of purchased power. Purchased power volume in 2008 decreased 21.0% comparedfuel for units that are not covered under PPAs. Power from these units is sold into the market or sold to 2007. Purchased power expense increased $29.3 million (17.1%) in 2007 when compared to 2006, primarily due to increased purchases of lower cost energy resources fromaffiliates under the Southern Pool and non-affiliates and contracts with Georgia Electric Membership Corporation and Dalton Utilities. Purchased power expense increased $10.7 million (6.6%) in 2006 when compared to 2005, due to purchases from the Southern Pool and contracts with PMPA and Dalton Utilities.

II-370


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
IIC.
Purchased power expenses will vary depending on demand and the availability and cost of generating resources available throughout the Southern Company system and other contract resources. Load requirements are submitted to the Southern Poolpower pool on an hourly basis and are fulfilled with the lowest cost alternative, whether that is generation owned by the Company, affiliate-owned generation, or external purchases.
Other Operations and Maintenance Expenses
In 2009, other operations and maintenance expenses decreased $11.1 million (7.5%) compared to 2008. This decrease was due primarily to transmission tariff penalties recognized in 2008, reduced transmission expenses due to a decrease in power sales into the market, and the timing of plant outages.
In 2008, other operations and maintenance expenses increased $12.7 million (9.4%) compared to 2007. This increase was due primarily to the timing of plant maintenance activities, transmission tariff penalties, and additional administrative and general expenses as a result of costs incurred to implement the FERC compliance plan. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “FERC Matters — Intercompany Interchange Contract” herein and Note 3 to the financial statements under “FERC Matters — Intercompany Interchange Contract” for additional information.
In 2007, other operations and maintenance expenses increased $39.7 million (41.7%) compared to 2006. This increase was due primarily to a full year of operations at Plant DeSoto and Plant Rowan acquired in June 2006 and September 2006, respectively, and additional administrative and general expenses as a result of costs incurred to implement the FERC compliance plan. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “FERC Matters — Intercompany Interchange Contract” herein, Note 2 to the financial statements under “DeSoto and Rowan Acquisitions,” and Note 3 to the financial statements under “FERC Matters — Intercompany Interchange Contract” for additional information.
Loss (Gain) on Sale of Property
In 2006, other operationsDecember 2009, the Company recorded a loss of $5.0 million on the transfer of DeSoto to Broadway. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “Acquisitions and maintenance expenses increased $14.5 million (17.9%) compared to 2005. This increase was primarily the result of the operation of new generating units from acquisitions of Plant Oleander in June 2005,Divestitures — West Georgia Acquisition and Plant DeSoto in June 2006,Divestiture” herein and Plant Rowan in September 2006. See Note 2 to the financial statements under “DeSoto“Acquisitions and Rowan Acquisitions”Divestitures — West Georgia Generating Company, LLC Acquisition and “Oleander Acquisition”DeSoto County Generating Company, LLC Divestiture” for additional information.
In January 2008, the Company recorded a gain of $6.0 million on the sale of an undeveloped tract of land.
Loss on IGCC Project
In November 2007, the Company and the Orlando Utilities Commission (OUC)OUC mutually agreed to terminate the construction of the gasifier portion of the IGCC project. Theproject, originally planned as a joint venture; however, the Company has continued construction of the gas-fired combined cycle generating facility, owned solely by the OUC. The Company recorded a loss in the fourth quarter 2007 of approximately $17.6 million related to the cancellation of the gasifier portion of the IGCC project. This loss consists of the write-off of construction costs of $14.0 million and an accrual for termination payments of $3.6 million. All termination payments were completed in 2008. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “Construction Projects — IGCC” herein

II-390


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Note 4 to the financial statements under “Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)” for additional information.
Gain on Sale of PropertySubsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
In January 2008, the Company recorded a gain of $6.0 million on the sale of an undeveloped tract of land.
Depreciation and Amortization
In 2009, depreciation and amortization increased $9.6 million (10.9%) compared to 2008. This increase was primarily due to the completion of Plant Franklin Unit 3 in June 2008 and higher depreciation rates implemented during 2009.
In 2008, depreciation and amortization increased $14.5 million (19.7%) compared to 2007. This increase was primarily due to the completion of Plant Oleander Unit 5 in December 2007 and Plant Franklin Unit 3 in June 2008 and higher depreciation rates implemented in January 2008.
In 2007, depreciation and amortization increased $8.0 million (12.2%) due to the completion of Plant Oleander Unit 5 in December 2007 and additional depreciation related to Plants DeSoto and Rowan acquired in June 2006 and September 2006, respectively, and higher depreciation rates from a study adopted in March 2006.
See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “Other Matters” herein for additional information regarding the Company’s ongoing review of depreciation estimates.
Depreciation and amortization increased $8.0 million (12.2%) and $11.7 million (21.6%) in 2007 and 2006, respectively. These increases were primarily the result of additional depreciation related to Plants DeSoto and Rowan acquired in June 2006 and September 2006, respectively, Plant Oleander acquired in June 2005, and higher depreciation rates from a depreciation study adopted in March 2006. See also Note 1 to the financial statements under “Depreciation” and Note 2 to the financial statements under “DeSoto and Rowan Acquisitions” and “Oleander Acquisition” for additional information.
Taxes Other Than Income Taxes
The 2009 decrease in taxes other than income taxes was not material.
In 2008, taxes other than income taxes increased $2.0 million (12.4%) compared to 2007. This increase was primarily due to property taxes related to the completion of Plant Oleander Unit 5 and Plant Franklin Unit 3 in December 2007 and June 2008, respectively.

II-371


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
The 2007 increase in taxes other than income taxes was not material.
In 2006, taxes other than income taxes increased $2.3 million (17.4%) compared to 2005. This increase was primarily due to incremental ad valorem taxes on new assets: Plants DeSoto and Rowan acquired in June 2006 and September 2006, respectively, and Plant Oleander acquired in June 2005. See Note 2 to the financial statements under “DeSoto and Rowan Acquisitions” and “Oleander Acquisition” for additional information.
Other Income (Expense), Net
Other income (expense), net increased $4.3 million (131.1%) in 2008. This increase was primarily due to a $6.4 million fee received in 2008 for participating in an asset auction. The Company was not the successful bidder in the asset auction.
Changes in other income, net in 2007 and 2006 were primarily the result of unrealized gains and losses on derivative energy contracts. See FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY — “Market Price Risk” herein and Notes 1 and 6 to the financial statements under “Financial Instruments” for additional information.
Interest Expense, Net of Amounts Capitalized
In 2009, interest expense, net of amounts capitalized increased $1.8 million (2.1%) compared to 2008. This increase was primarily due to a $5.5 million decrease in capitalized interest as a result of the completion of Plant Franklin Unit 3 in June 2008, partially offset by a $1.7 million decrease in short-term borrowing levels during 2009 and a decrease in amortization of interest rate derivatives of $2.1 million.
In 2008, interest expense, net of amounts capitalized increased $4.0 million (5.1%) compared to 2007. This increase was primarily the result of a decrease in capitalized interest as a result of the completion of Plant Oleander Unit 5 in December 2007 and Plant Franklin Unit 3 in June 2008, partially offset by a decrease in short-term borrowing levels in 2008.
In 2007, interest expense, net of amounts capitalized decreased $1.0 million (1.2%) compared to 2006. This decrease was primarily due to additional capitalized interest of $10.9 million on active construction projects and reduced interest on commercial paper of $2.0 million due to lower borrowing levels. This decrease was partially offset by an $11.9 million increase in interest on $200 million of senior notes that were issued in November 2006.
In 2006, interestProfit Recognized on Construction Contract
Profit recognized on the construction contract with the OUC whereby the Company has provided engineering, procurement, and construction services to build a combined cycle unit for the OUC was $13.3 million in 2009. No profit or loss on this contract was recognized in 2008 or 2007.
Other Income (Expense), Net
Other income (expense), net was an expense of $0.4 million in 2009 versus income of $7.6 million in 2008. This change was primarily due to a $6.4 million fee received in 2008 for participating in an asset auction. The Company was not the successful bidder in the asset auction.
Other income (expense), net increased $0.8$4.3 million (1.0%(131.1%) compared to 2005.in 2008. This increase was primarily due to a $6.4 million fee received in 2008 for participating in an asset auction. The Company was not the resultsuccessful bidder in the asset auction.
Changes in other income (expense), net in 2007 were not material.

II-391


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Income Taxes
In 2009, income taxes decreased $7.3 million (7.8%) compared to 2008. This decrease was due to changes in the Internal Revenue Code of additional debt incurred for acquisitions. This increase was1986, as amended (Internal Revenue Code), Section 199 production activities deduction, lower state income taxes, and tax benefits received under convertible investment tax credits. Higher pre-tax earnings partially offset by $5.6 million of interest capitalized on active construction projects. For additional information, see FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “Construction Projects” herein,these decreases. See Note 45 to the financial statements under “Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC),” and Note 7 to the financial statements under “Expansion Program.”
Income Taxesfor additional information.
Income taxes increased $9.3 million (11.2%) in 2008 and $1.7 million (2.1%) in 2007 and $9.9 million (13.9%) in 2006 primarily due to higher pre-tax earnings from 2006 through 2008 and changes in the Section 199 production activities deduction.
Effects of Inflation
WhenThe Company is party to long-term contracts reflecting market-based rates, including inflation exceeds projections used in market, term, and cost evaluations performed at contract initiation, the effectsexpectations. Any adverse effect of inflation can create an economic loss. In addition, the income tax laws are based on historical costs. Therefore inflation creates an economic loss as the Company is recovering its costs of investments in dollars that could have less purchasing power. While the inflation rate has been relatively low in recent years, it continues to have an adverse effect on the Company due to large investment in utility plant with long economic lives. Conventional accounting for historical costs doesCompany’s results of operations has not recognize this economic loss or the partially offsetting gain that arises through financing facilities with fixed money obligations such as long-term debt.been substantial.
FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL
General
The results of operations for the past three years are not necessarily indicative of future earnings potential. The level of the Company’s future earnings depends on numerous factors that affect the opportunities, challenges, and risks of the Company’s competitive wholesale business. These factors include the Company’s ability to achieve sales growth while containing costs. Another major factor is federal regulatory policy, which may impact the Company’s level of participation in the market. The level of future earnings also depends on numerous factors including regulatory matters (such as those related to affiliate contracts), creditworthiness

II-372


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
of customers, total generating capacity available in the Southeast, the successful remarketing of capacity as current contracts expire, and the Company’s ability to execute its acquisition strategy.strategy and to construct generating facilities. Other factors that could influence future earnings include weather, demand, generation patterns, and operational limitations. Recent recessionary conditions mayhave lowered demand and have negatively impactimpacted capacity revenues.revenues under the Company’s PPAs where the amounts purchased are based on demand. The Company is unable to predict whether demand under these PPAs will return to pre-recession levels. The timing and extent of the economic recovery will impact future earnings.
The Company’s system generating capacity increased 659 MW325 MWs due to the completionacquisition of Franklin Unit 3West Georgia and divestiture of DeSoto in June 2008.December 2009 as described herein. In general, the Company has constructed or acquired new generating capacity only after entering into long-term capacity contracts for the new facilities which are optimized by limited energy trading activities. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL —“Acquisitions and Divestitures” and “Construction Projects” herein for additional information.
Power Sales Agreements
The Company’s sales are primarily through long-term PPAs. The Company is working to maintain and expand its share of the wholesale markets. Recent oversupply of generating capacity in the market is being reduced and themarket. The Company expects that many areas of the market will need capacity beyond 2014.in 2016.
The Company’s PPAs consist of two types of agreements. The first type, referred to as a unit or block sale, is a customer purchase from a dedicated plant unit where all or a portion of the generation from that unit is reserved for that customer. The Company typically has the ability to serve the unit or block sale customer from an alternate resource. The second type, referred to as requirements service, provides that the Company serve the customer’s capacity and energy requirements from a combination of the customer’s own generating units and from Company resources not dedicated to serve unit or block sales. The Company has rights to purchase power provided by the requirements customers’ resources when economically viable.

II-392


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
The Company has entered into the following PPAs over the past 3three years:
             
          Contract
  Date Megawatts Plant Term
 
2009
Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia (MEAG Power)(a)
December 2009157(g)West Georgia12/09-4/29
Georgia Energy Cooperative, Inc. (GEC)(a)
December 2009151West Georgia6/10-5/30
Austin Energy(b)
October 2009100Nacogdoches6/12-5/32
Seminole Electric Cooperative, Inc. (Seminole)(c)
June 2009509Oleander1/16-5/21
 
2008
            
North Carolina Municipal Power Agency No. 1 (NCMPA1) December 2008  180  Cleveland  1/12-12/31 
North Carolina Electric Membership Corporation (NCEMC) (a)
 November 2008  180  Cleveland  1/12-12/36 
NCEMC(a)
 November 2008  180(b)(d) Cleveland  1/12-12/36 
EnergyUnited November 2008  100  Purchased(c)(e)  1/12-12/21 
The Energy Authority, Inc. August 2008  151  Rowan  1/11-12/14 
Georgia Electric Membership Corporations (EMCs) (d)(f)
 July 2008  500360(e)(g) Unassigned  1/10-12/34(d)(f)
Florida Municipal Power Agency (FMPA) (f)(h)
 July 2008  85  Stanton  10/13-9/23 
  
2007
            
Progress Energy Carolina Inc. December 2007  155  Rowan  1/10-12/10 
Progress Energy Carolina Inc. December 2007  160  Wansley  1/11-12/11 
Georgia Power April 2007  561  Wansley  6/10-5/17 
Georgia Power April 2007  292  Dahlberg  6/10-5/25 
Progress Energy Carolina Inc. February 2007  150  Rowan  1/10-12/19 
 
2006
Gulf PowerOctober 2006292Dahlberg6/09-5/14
Duke Power (g)
September 2006152Rowan9/06-12/10
Duke Power (g)
September 2006304Rowan9/06-12/10
NCMPA1 (g)
September 200650Rowan9/06-12/10
NCMPA1 (g)
September 2006150Rowan1/11-12/30
EnergyUnitedMay 2006149(e)Unassigned9/06-12/10
EnergyUnitedMay 2006335(e)Unassigned1/11-12/25
EnergyUnitedMay 2006161(h)Rowan1/11-12/25
Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Constellation)(i)
April 2006621Franklin1/09-12/15
Seminole Electric Cooperative, Inc.February 2006465Oleander1/10-12/15
FMPAFebruary 2006162Oleander12/07 -12/27

II-373


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
 
(a) Subject to approval byAssumed contract through the Rural Utilities Service.West Georgia acquisition in 2009.
 
(b)Assumed contract through the Nacogdoches acquisition in 2009. Commercial operation of Plant Nacogdoches is expected to begin in June 2012.
(c)This agreement is an extension of the current agreement with Seminole for Plant Oleander.
(d) Power purchases under this agreement will increase over the term of the agreement. 45 MWs will be sold from 2012 through 2016, 90 MWs will be sold from 2017 through 2018, and 180 MWs will be sold from 2019 through 2036.
 
(c)(e) Power to serve this agreement will be purchased under a third party agreement for resale to EnergyUnited. The purchases will be resold at cost.
 
(d)(f) These agreements are extensions of current agreements with ten10 Georgia EMCs. Eight agreements were extended from 2010 through 2031 and two agreements were extended from 2013 through 2034.
 
(e)(g) Represents average annual capacity purchases.
 
(f)(h) This agreement is an extension of the current agreement with FMPA for Plant Stanton.
(g)Assumed contract through the Plant Rowan acquisition in 2006.
(h)PPA was amended in 2008 reducing MWs purchased from 205 to 161.
(i)Contract was assumed by Constellation from Progress Ventures, Inc. in 2007.
The Company has PPAs with some of Southern Company’s traditional operating companies and with other investor owned utilities, independent power producers, municipalities, and electric cooperatives. Although some of the Company’s PPAs are with the traditional operating companies, the Company’s generating facilities are not in the traditional operating companies’ regulated rate bases, and the Company is not able to seek recovery from the traditional operating companies’ ratepayers for construction, repair, environmental, or maintenance costs. The Company expects that the capacity payments in the PPAs will produce sufficient cash flow to cover costs, pay debt service, and provide an equity return. However, the Company’s overall profit will depend on numerous factors, including efficient operation of its generating facilities.facilities and demand under the Company’s PPAs.
As a general matter, existing PPAs provide that the purchasers are responsible for either procuring the fuel or reimbursing the Company for the cost of fuel relating to the energy delivered under such PPAs. To the extent a particular generating facility does not meet the operational requirements contemplated in the PPAs, the Company may be responsible for excess fuel costs. With respect to fuel transportation risk, most of the Company’s PPAs provide that the counterparties are responsible for transporting the fuel to the particular generating facility.
Fixed and variable operation and maintenance costs will be recovered through capacity charges based on dollars-per-kilowatt year or energy charges based on dollars-per-MW hour. In general, the Company has long-term service contracts with General Electric and Siemens AG to reduce its exposure to certain operation and maintenance costs relating to such vendors’ applicable equipment. See Note 7 to the financial statements under “Long-Term Service Agreements” for additional information.

II-393


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Many of the Company’s PPAs have provisions that require the posting of collateral or an acceptable substitute guarantee in the event that Standard &and Poor’s Rating Services, a division of the McGraw Hill Companies, Inc. (S&P) or Moody’s Investors Service (Moody’s) downgrades the credit ratings of the counterparty to an unacceptable credit rating or if the counterparty is not rated or fails to maintain a minimum coverage ratio. The PPAs are expected to provide the Company with a stable source of revenue during their respective terms.
The Company has entered into long-term power sales agreements for an average of 83%84% of its available capacity for the next five years and 74% of its available capacity for the next 10 years as follows:
                     
  2009- 2011- 2013- 2015- 2017-
  2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
 
  
Average available capacity(a)
  7,709   8,015   8,411   8,271   8,131 
Average contracted capacity  7,171   7,064   7,348   6,617   5,325 
Percent contracted
  93%  88%  87%  80%  66%
           
                     
  2010- 2012- 2014- 2016- 2018-
  2011 2013 2015 2017 2019
 
                     
Average available capacity (MWs)(a)
  7,964   8,774   8,774   8,494   8,494 
Average contracted capacity (MWs)  6,940   7,199   7,083   5,432   4,959 
Percent contracted
  87%  82%  81%  64%  58%
 
(a). Includes confirmed third party power purchases for 20092010 through 2018.2019.    

II-374


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Environmental Matters
The Company’s operations are subject to extensive regulation by state and federal environmental agencies under a variety of statutes and regulations governing environmental media, including air, water, and land resources. Applicable statutes include the Clean Air Act; the Clean Water Act; the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; the Toxic Substances Control Act; the Emergency Planning & Community Right-to-Know Act; the Endangered Species Act; and related federal and state regulations. Compliance with possible additional federal or state legislation or regulations related to global climate change, air quality, or other environmental and health concerns cancould also significantly affect the Company.
New environmental legislation or regulations, such as requirements related to greenhouse gases or changes to existing statutes or regulations, could affect many areas of the Company’s operations. While the Company’s PPAs generally contain provisions that permit charging the counterparty with some of the new costs incurred as a result of changes in environmental laws and regulations, the full impact of any such regulatory or legislative changes cannot be determined at this time.
Because the Company’s units are newer gas-fired generating facilities, costs associated with environmental compliance for these facilities have been less significant than for similarly situated coal-fired generating facilities or older gas-fired generating facilities. Environmental, natural resource, and land use concerns, including the applicability of air quality limitations, the availability of water withdrawal rights, uncertainties regarding aesthetic impacts such as increased light or noise, and concerns about potential adverse health impacts, can, however, increase the cost of siting and operating any type of future electric generating facility. The impact of such statutes and regulations on the Company cannot be determined at this time.
Litigation over environmental issues and claims of various types, including property damage, personal injury, common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of environmental requirements such as air and water quality standards, has increased generally throughout the United States. In particular, personal injury claims for damages caused by alleged exposure to hazardous materials have become more frequent. The ultimate outcome of such potential litigation against the Company cannot be determined at this time.
Global Climate Issues
Federal legislative proposals that would impose mandatory requirements related to greenhouse gas emissions and renewable energy standards, and energy efficiency standards continue to be strongly considered in Congress, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has been identified as a high priority by the current Administration. The ultimate outcomeOn June 26, 2009, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of these proposals cannot be determined at this time; however,2009 (ACES), which would impose mandatory greenhouse gas restrictions onthrough implementation of a cap and trade program, a renewable energy standard, and other measures, was passed by the Company’sHouse of Representatives. ACES would require reductions of greenhouse gas emissions could result in significant additionalon a national basis to a level that is 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, 42% below 2005 levels by 2030, and 83% below 2005 levels by 2050. In addition, ACES would provide for renewable energy standards of 6% by 2012 and 20% by 2020. Similar legislation is being considered by the Senate. The financial and operational impact of such legislation, if enacted, will depend on a variety of factors. These factors include the specific greenhouse gas emissions limits or renewable energy requirements, the timing of implementation of these limits or requirements, the level of emissions allowances allocated and the level that must be purchased, the purchase price of emissions allowances, the development and commercial availability of technologies for renewable energy and for the reduction of emissions, the degree to which offsets may be used for compliance, costsprovisions for cost containment (if any), the impact on natural gas prices, and cost recovery through PPAs. There can be no assurance that could affect future unit retirementany legislation will be enacted or as to the ultimate form of any legislation. Additional or alternative legislation may be adopted as well.

II-394


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and replacement decisions and results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition.Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
In April 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles. On December 15, 2009, the EPA published a final determination, which became effective on January 14, 2010, that certain greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles endanger public health and welfare due to climate change. On September 28, 2009, the EPA published a proposed rule regulating greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles under the Clean Air Act. The EPA has stated that once this rule is currently developing its responseeffective, it will cause carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to this decision. Regulatory decisions that will follow from this response may have implicationsbecome regulated pollutants under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) preconstruction permit program and the Title V operating permit program, which both apply to power plants. As a result, the construction of new facilities or the major modification of existing facilities could trigger the requirement for both newa PSD permit and existingthe installation of the best available control technology for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. The EPA also published a proposed rule governing how these programs would be applied to stationary sources, such asincluding power plants.plants, on October 27, 2009. The EPA has stated that it expects to finalize these proposed rules in March 2010. The ultimate outcome of the endangerment finding and these rulemaking activitiesproposed rules cannot be determined at this time; however, as with the current legislative proposals, mandatory restrictions on the Company’s greenhouse gas emissions could result in significant additional compliance costs that could affect future unit retirementtime and replacement decisions and results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition.
In addition, some states are considering or have undertaken actions to regulate and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For example, on June 25, 2008, Florida’s Governor signed comprehensive energy-related legislation that includes authorization for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to adopt rules for a cap-and-trade regulatory program to address greenhouse gas emissions from electric utilities, conditioned upon their ratification by the legislature no sooner than the 2010 legislative session. This legislation also authorizes the Florida Public Service Commission to adopt a renewable portfolio standard for public utilities, subject to legislative ratification. The impact of this and any similar legislation on the Company will depend on the future development, adoption, legislative ratification, implementation,additional regulatory action and potentialany legal challenges to rules governing greenhouse gas emissions and mandates regarding the use of renewable energy, and the ultimate outcome cannot be determined at this time.challenges.
International climate change negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change also continue. Current efforts focus on a potential successor toA nonbinding agreement was announced during the Kyoto Protocol for the post 2012 timeframe, with a conclusion to thismost recent round of negotiations targeted for the end of 2009.in December 2009 that included a pledge from both developed and developing countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. The outcome and impact of the international negotiations cannot be determined at this time.
Although the outcome of federal, state, or international initiatives cannot be determined at this time, mandatory restrictions on the Company’s greenhouse gas emissions or requirements relating to renewable energy or energy efficiency on the federal or state level are likely to result in significant additional compliance costs, including significant capital expenditures. Also, additional compliance costs could affect results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through PPAs. Further, higher costs that are recovered through regulated rates at other utilities could contribute to an overall reduction in demand for electricity, which could negatively impact the Company’s results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition.
In 2008, the total carbon dioxide emissions from the fossil fuel-fired electric generating units owned by the Company were approximately 6 million metric tons. The preliminary estimate of carbon dioxide emissions from these units in 2009 is approximately 7 million metric tons. The level of carbon dioxide emissions from year to year will be dependent on the level of generation, which is determined primarily by demand, the unit cost of fuel consumed, and the availability of generating units.
The Company continues to evaluate its future energy and emissionemissions profiles and is participating in voluntary programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to help develop and advance technology to reduce emissions.

II-375


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
emissions, including the construction of a biomass plant in Sacul, Texas.
Carbon Dioxide Litigation
OnKivalina Case
In February 26, 2008, the Native Village of Kivalina and the City of Kivalina filed a suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against several electric utilities (including Southern Company), several oil companies, and a coal company. The plaintiffs are the governing bodies of an Inupiat village in Alaska. The plaintiffs contend that the village is being destroyed by erosion allegedly caused by global warming that the plaintiffs attribute to emissions of greenhouse gases by the defendants. The plaintiffs assert claims for public and private nuisance and contend that some of the defendants have acted in concert and are therefore jointly and severally liable for the plaintiffs’ damages. The suit seeks damages for lost property values and for the cost of relocating the village, which is alleged to be $95 million to $400 million. On June 30, 2008, all defendants filed motions to dismiss this case. Southern Company believes that these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. On September 30, 2009, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss the case based on lack of jurisdiction and ruled that the claims were barred by the political question doctrine and by the plaintiffs’ failure to establish the standard for determining that the defendants’ conduct caused the injury alleged. On November 5, 2009, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit challenging the district court’s order dismissing the case. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.

II-395


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Other Litigation
Common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas emissions have become more frequent, and courts have recently determined that private parties and states have standing to bring such claims. For example, on October 16, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi’s dismissal of private party claims against certain oil, coal, chemical, and utility companies alleging damages as a result of Hurricane Katrina. In reversing the dismissal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that plaintiffs have standing to assert their nuisance, trespass, and negligence claims and none of these claims are barred by the political question doctrine. The Company is not currently a party to this litigation but was named as a defendant in an amended complaint which was rendered moot in August 2007 by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi when such court dismissed the original matter. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
FERC Matters
Market-Based Rate AuthorityEnvironmental Statutes and Regulations
The Company has authorization from the FERC to sell power to non-affiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices. Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based contract with an affiliate.
In DecemberFebruary 2004, the FERC initiatedEPA finalized the Industrial Boiler (IB) MACT rule, which imposed limits on hazardous air pollutants from industrial boilers, including biomass boilers. Compliance with the final rule was scheduled to begin in September 2007; however, in response to challenges to the final rule, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the IB MACT rule in its entirety in July 2007 and ordered the EPA to develop a proceedingnew IB MACT rule. In September 2009, the deadline to assess Southern Company’s generation dominance within its retail service territory.promulgate a proposed rule was extended from July 15, 2009 to April 15, 2010, with a final rule required by December 16, 2010. The ability to charge market-based rates in other marketsEPA is not an issue incurrently developing the proceeding. Any new market-based rate sales by the Company in Southern Company’s retail service territory entered into during a 15-month refund period that ended in May 2006 could be subject to refund to a cost-based rate level.
In November 2007, the presiding administrative law judge issued an initial decision regardingrule and may change the methodology to be used indetermine the generation dominance tests. The proceedings are ongoing. The ultimate outcome of this generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined, but an adverse decision by the FERC in a final order could require the Company to charge cost-based ratesMACT limits for certain wholesale sales in the Southern Company retail service territory, which may be lower than negotiated market-based rates, and could also result in total refunds of up to $0.7 million, plus interest. The Company believes that there is no meritorious basis for an adverse decision in this proceeding and is vigorously defending itself in this matter.
In June 2007, the FERC issued its final rule in Order No. 697 regarding market-based rate authority. The FERC generally retained its current market-based rate standards. Responding to a number of requests for rehearing, the FERC issued Order No. 697-A on April 21, 2008 and Order No. 697-B on December 12, 2008. These orders largely affirmed its prior revision and codification of the regulations governing market-based rates for public utilities. In accordance with the orders, Southern Company submitted to the FERC an updated market power analysis on September 2, 2008 related to its continued market-based rate authority. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
On October 17, 2008, Southern Company filed with the FERC a revised market-based rate (MBR) tariff and a new cost-based rate (CBR) tariff. The revised MBR tariff provides for a “must offer” energy auction whereby Southern Company offers all of its available energy for sale in a day-ahead auction and an hour-ahead auction with reserve prices not to exceed the CBR tariff price, after considering Southern Company’s native load requirements, reliability obligations, and sales commitments to third parties. All sales under the energy auction would be at market clearing prices established under the auction rules. The new CBR tariff provides for a cost-based price for wholesale sales of less than a year. On December 18, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the MBR tariff subject to certain revisions to the auction proposal. On January 21, 2009, Southern Company made a compliance filing that accepted all the conditions of the MBR tariff order. When this order becomes final, Southern Company will have 30 days to implement the wholesale auction. On December 31, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the CBR tariff subject to providing additional information concerning one aspect of the tariff. On January 30, 2009, Southern Company filed a response addressing the FERC inquiry to the CBR tariff order. Implementation of the energy auction in accordance with the MBR tariff order is expected to adequately mitigate going forward any presumption of market power that Southern Company may have in the Southern Company retail service territory. The timing of when the FERC may issue the final orders on the MBR and CBR tariffs and the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.

II-376


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Intercompany Interchange Contract
The majority of the Company’s generation fleet is operated under the IIC, as approved by the FERC. In May 2005, the FERC initiated a new proceeding to examine (1) the provisions of the IIC among the traditional operating companies, the Company, and Southern Company Services, Inc., as agent, under the terms of which the Southern Pool is operated, (2) whether any parties to the IIC have violated the FERC’s standards of conduct applicable to utility companies that are transmission providers, and (3) whether Southern Company’s code of conduct defining the Company as a “system company” rather than a “marketing affiliate” is just and reasonable. In connection with the formation of the Company, the FERC authorized the Company’s inclusion in the IIC in 2000. The FERC also previously approved Southern Company’s code of conduct.
In October 2006, the FERC issued an order accepting a settlement resolving the proceeding subject to Southern Company’s agreement to accept certain modifications to the settlement’s terms and Southern Company notified the FERC that it accepted the modifications. The modifications largely involve functional separation and information restrictions related to marketing activities conducted on behalf of Southern Power. In November 2006, Southern Company filed with the FERC a compliance plan in connection with the order. In April 2007, the FERC approved, with certain modifications, the plan submitted by Southern Company. In November 2007, Southern Company notified the FERC that the plan had been implemented. On December 12, 2008, the FERC division of audits issued for public comment its final audit report pertaining to compliance implementation and related matters. No comments challenging the audit report’s findings were submitted. A decision is now pending from the FERC. The annual cost of implementing the order is approximately $7.0 million. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.industrial boilers.
Income Tax Matters
Legislation
On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). Major tax incentives in the ARRA include an extension of bonus depreciation and multiple renewable energy incentives. TheseThe Company estimates the cash flow reduction to 2009 tax payments as a result of the bonus depreciation provisions of the ARRA to be immaterial. The Company is receiving investment tax credits (ITCs) under the renewable energy incentives related to the Nacogdoches biomass facility which will have a material impact on cash flows and net income. On December 8, 2009, President Obama announced proposals to accelerate job growth that include an extension of the bonus depreciation provision for the ARRA for 2010, which could have a significant impact on the Company’s future cash flow and net income. Additionally,income of the ARRA includes programs for renewable energy, transmission and smart grid enhancement, fossil energy and research, and energy efficiency and conservation. Company. The Company is currently assessing the other financial implications of the ARRA.
The ultimate impact of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Internal Revenue Code Section 199 Domestic Production Deduction
The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 created a tax deduction for a portion of income attributable to U.S. production activities as defined in Section 199 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, Section 199 (production activities deduction).Code. The deduction is equal to a stated percentage of qualified production activities net income. The percentage is phased in over the years 2005 through 2010 with a 3% rate applicable to the years 2005 and 2006, a 6% rate applicable for the years 2007 through 2009, and a 9% rate thereafter. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has not clearly defined a methodology for calculating this deduction. However, Southern Company has agreed with the IRS on a calculation methodology and signed a closing agreement on December 11, 2008. Therefore, the Company reversed the unrecognized tax benefit and adjusted the deduction to conform to the agreement. The net impact of the reversal of the unrecognized tax benefits combined with the application of the new methodology had no material effect on the Company’s financial statements. See Note 5 to the financial statements under “Effective Tax Rate” for additional information.
Acquisitions and Divestitures
Nacogdoches Acquisition
On October 8, 2009, the Company acquired all of the outstanding membership interests of Nacogdoches from American Renewables LLC, the original developer of the project, for approximately $50.1 million in cash consideration. Nacogdoches is constructing a biomass generating plant in Sacul, Texas with an estimated capacity of 100 MWs. The generating plant will be fueled from wood waste. Construction commenced in 2009 and the plant is expected to begin commercial operation in 2012. Costs incurred through December 31, 2009 were $86.6 million. The total estimated cost of the project is expected to be between $475 million and $500 million. The output of the plant is contracted under a PPA with Austin Energy that begins in 2012 and expires in 2032 or until a contractual limit of $2.3 billion in billings is reached. See Note 2 to the financial statements under “Acquisitions and Divestitures –Nacogdoches Power LLC Acquisition” for additional information.

II-396


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
West Georgia Acquisition and Plant DeSoto Divestiture
On December 17, 2009, the Company acquired all of the outstanding membership interests of West Georgia from Broadway, an affiliate of LS Power. The acquisition agreement provided for the transfer of all the outstanding membership interests of DeSoto from the Company to Broadway and the payment by the Company of approximately $144.0 million in cash consideration. West Georgia was merged into the Company and the Company now owns a 669-MW nameplate capacity generating facility consisting of four combustion turbine natural gas generating units with oil back-up. The output from two units is contracted under PPAs with MEAG Power and GEC. The MEAG Power agreement began in 2009 and expires in 2029. The GEC agreement begins in 2010 and expires in 2030. See Note 2 to the financial statements under “Acquisitions and Divestitures — West Georgia Generating Company, LLC Acquisition and DeSoto County Generating Company, LLC Divestiture” for additional information.
Construction Projects
Cleveland County Units 1-4
OnIn December 5, 2008, the Company announced that it will build an electric generating plant in Cleveland County, North Carolina. The plant will consist of four combustion turbine natural gas generating units with a total generating capacity of 720 MW.MWs. The units are expected to go intobegin commercial operation in 2012. Costs incurred through December 31, 20082009 were $5.2$62.7 million. The total estimated construction cost is expected to be between $350 million and $400 million, which is included in the capital program estimates described under FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY — “Capital Requirements and Contractual Obligations” herein.
The Company has also entered into PPAs with NCEMC and NCMPA1 for a portion of the generating capacity from the plant that will begin in 2012 and expire in 2036 and 2031, respectively. NCEMC will purchase 180 MWMWs of capacity that will be supported by one unit at the plant and will purchase capacity from a second unit at the plant that will increase to 180 MWMWs over a seven yearseven-year phase-in period. NCMPA1 will purchase 180 MWMWs from a third unit at the plant. The NCEMC PPAs are subject to approvalwere approved by the Rural Utilities Service. The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.

II-377


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Service on March 6, 2009.
Nacogdoches Biomass Plant Franklin Unit 3
The Company completed construction of Plant Franklin Unit 3is currently constructing a biomass plant in June 2008. Total costs incurred were $309.9 million. The unit is a natural gas-fueled combined cycle located in Smiths, Alabama with a nameplate capacity of 659 MW. The unit will be usedSacul, Texas. See “Acquisitions and Divestitures — Nacogdoches Acquisition” herein and Note 2 to provide annual capacitythe financial statements under “Acquisitions and Divestitures — Nacogdoches Power LLC Acquisition” for a PPA with Constellation from 2009 through 2015.
Plant Oleander Unit 5
The Company completed construction of Plant Oleander Unit 5 in December 2007. Total costs incurred were $58.0 million. This unit is a combustion turbine with a nameplate capacity of 163 MW located in Brevard County, Florida. This unit is contracted to provide annual capacity for a PPA with FMPA from 2007 through 2027.
IGCC
In December 2005, the Company and OUC executed definitive agreements for development of a 285-MW IGCC project in Orlando, Florida. The definitive agreements provided that the Company would own at least 65% of the gasifier portion of the IGCC project. OUC would own the remainder of the gasifier portion and 100% of the combined cycle portion of the IGCC project. The Company signed cooperative agreements with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) that provided up to $293.75 million in grant funding for the gasification portion of this project. The IGCC project was expected to begin commercial operation in 2010. Due to uncertainty surrounding potential state regulations relating to greenhouse gas emissions, the Company and OUC mutually agreed to terminate the construction of the gasifier portion of the IGCC project in November 2007. The Company has continued construction of the gas-fired combined cycle generating facility for OUC under a fixed-price, long-term contract for engineering, procurement, and construction services. The Company expects the construction to be completed substantially at the contractual fixed price and no profit or loss is anticipated at this time. The Company recorded a loss in the fourth quarter 2007 of approximately $17.6 million related to cancellation of the gasifier portion of the IGCC project. This amount is net of reimbursements from OUC and the DOE. This loss consists of the write-off of construction costs of $14.0 million and an accrual for termination costs of $3.6 million. All termination costs were paid in 2008. As part of the termination agreement with OUC, the Company sold a tract of land in Orange County, Florida to OUC. The Company recorded a gain of approximately $6 million on this sale in the first quarter 2008.additional information.
Other Matters
The Company completed depreciation studies in 20062008 and 2008.2009. The composite depreciation rates for its property, plant, and equipment were updated in these studies. These changes in estimates arise from changes in useful life assumptions for certain components of plant in service. These changes increased depreciation expense prospectively beginning MarchJanuary 1, 20062008 and January 1, 20082009 and reduced net income. The net income impacts of these changes were $3.8$2.8 million and $2.8$3.1 million in 2008 and 2009, respectively. See Note 1 to the financial statements under “Depreciation” for additional information. The Company reviews its estimated useful lives and salvage values on an ongoing basis. The results of these reviews could have a material impact on net income in the near term. See ACCOUNTING POLICIES — “Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates” herein for additional information.
From time to time, the Company is involved in various matters being litigated and regulatory matters that could affect future earnings. In addition, the Company is subject to certain claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company’s business activities are subject to extensive governmental regulation related to public health and the environment. Litigation over environmental issues and claims of various types, including property and other damage, personal injury, common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of environmental requirements such as air and water quality standards, has increased generally throughout the United States. In particular, personal injury and other claims for damages caused by alleged exposure to hazardous materials, and common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas and other emissions, have become more frequent. The ultimate outcome of such pending or potential litigation against the Company cannot be predicted at this time; however, for current proceedings not specifically reported herein, management does not anticipate that the liabilities, if any, arising from such current proceedings would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial statements. See Note 3 to the financial statements for information regarding material issues.

II-397


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The Company prepares its consolidated financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Significant accounting policies are described in Note 1 to the financial statements. In the application of these policies, certain

II-378


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
estimates are made that may have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations and related disclosures. Different assumptions and measurements could produce estimates that are significantly different from those recorded in the financial statements. Senior management has reviewed and discussed the critical accounting policies and estimates described below with the Audit Committee of Southern Company’s Board of Directors.
Revenue Recognition
The Company’s revenue recognition depends on appropriate classification and documentation of transactions in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Statement No. 133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities,” as amended and interpreted (SFAS No. 133)generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). In general, the Company’s power sale transactions can be classified in one of four categories: non-derivatives, normal sales, cash flow hedges, and mark to market. For more information on derivative transactions, see FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY — “Market Price Risk” herein and Notes 1 and 69 to the financial statements under “Financial Instruments.”statements. The Company’s revenues are dependent upon significant judgments used to determine the appropriate transaction classification, which must be documented upon the inception of each contract. Factors that must be considered in making these determinations include:
  Assessing whether a sales contract meets the definition of a lease;
 
  Assessing whether a sales contract meets the definition of a derivative;
 
  Assessing whether a sales contract meets the definition of a capacity contract;
 
  Assessing the probability at inception and throughout the term of the individual contract that the contract will result in physical delivery;
 
  Ensuring that the contract quantities do not exceed available generating capacity (including purchased capacity);
 
  Identifying the hedging instrument, the hedged transaction, and the nature of the risk being hedged; and
 
  Assessing hedge effectiveness at inception and throughout the contract term.term
Normal Sale and Non-Derivative Transactions
The Company has entered into capacity contracts that provide for the sale of electricity and that involve physical delivery in quantities within the Company’s available generating capacity. These contracts either do not meet the definition of a derivative or are designated as normal sales, thus exempting them from fair value accounting under SFAS No. 133.in accordance with GAAP. As a result, such transactions are accounted for as executory contracts; additionally, the related revenue is recognized in accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) No. 91-6, “Revenue Recognition of Long-Term Power Sales Contracts” on an accrual basis in amounts equal to the lesser of the cumulative levelized amount or the cumulative amount billable under the contract over the respective contract periods. Revenues are recorded on a gross or net basis in accordance with EITF No. 99-19, “Reporting Revenue Gross as a Principal versus Net as an Agent.” Revenues from transactions that do not meet the definition of a derivative are also recorded in this manner.GAAP. Contracts recorded on the accrual basis represented the majority of the Company’s operating revenues for the year ended December 31, 2008.2009.
Cash Flow Hedge Transactions
The Company designates other derivative contracts for the sale of electricity as cash flow hedges of anticipated sale transactions. These contracts are marked to market through other comprehensive income over the life of the contract. Realized gains and losses are then recognized in revenues as incurred.
Mark to MarketMark-to-Market Transactions
Contracts for sales and purchases of electricity, which meet the definition of a derivative and that are not designated as normal sales and are notpurchases or designated as cash flow hedges, are marked to market and recorded directly through net income. Net unrealized gains (losses) on such contracts were not materialrecognized in wholesale revenues for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 2007, or 2006.were $5.3 million and $(1.9) million, respectively. Mark-to-market transactions were immaterial in 2007.

II-379II-398


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
Percentage of Completion
The Company is currently engaged in a long-term contract for engineering, procurement, and construction services to build a combined cycle unit for the OUC. Construction activities commenced in 2006 and are expected to be complete by the end ofwere substantially completed in 2009. RevenuesBillings and costs are recognized using the percentage-of-completionpercentage of completion method. The Company utilizes the cost-to-cost approach as this method is less subjective than relying on assessments of physical progress. The percentage of completion represents the percentage of the total costs incurred to the estimated total cost of the contract. RevenuesBillings and costs are recognized on a net basis in other income (expense) by applying this percentage to the total revenuesbillings and estimated costs of the contract.
Asset ImpairmentsImpairment of Long Lived Assets and Intangibles
The Company’s investments in long-lived assets are primarily generation assets, whether in service or under construction. The Company’s intangible assets consist of acquired PPAs that are amortized over the term of the PPAs and goodwill resulting from acquisitions. The Company evaluates the carrying value of these assets under FASB Statement No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-lived Assets,”in accordance with accounting standards whenever indicators of potential impairment exist.exist, or annually in the case of goodwill. Examples of impairment indicators could include significant changes in construction schedules, current period losses combined with a history of losses or a projection of continuing losses, a significant decrease in market prices, and the inability to remarket generating capacity for an extended period. If an indicator exists, the asset is tested for recoverability by comparing the asset carrying value to the sum of the undiscounted expected future cash flows directly attributable to the asset. A high degree of judgment is required in developing estimates related to these evaluations, which are based on projections of various factors, including the following:
  Future demand for electricity based on projections of economic growth and estimates of available generating capacity;
 
  Future power and natural gas prices, which have been quite volatile in recent years; and
 
  Future operating costs.
Acquisition Accounting
The Company has been engaged in a strategy of acquiring assets. The Company has accounted for these acquisitions under the purchase method in accordance with FASB Statement No. 141, “Business Combinations.”GAAP. Accordingly, the Company has included these operations in the consolidated financial statements from the respective date of acquisition. The purchase price of each acquisition was allocated to the fair value of the identifiable assets and liabilities based on a valuation prepared by a third party. The Company adopted FASB Statement No. 141 (revised 2007), “Business Combinations” (SFAS No. 141R) effective January 1, 2009.liabilities. Any due diligence or transition costs incurred by the Company in assessingfor successful or potential acquisitions that will close after December 31, 2008 have been expensed as incurred.
Contingent Obligations
The Company is subject to a number of federal and state laws and regulations, as well as other factors and conditions that potentially subject it to environmental, litigation, income tax, and other risks. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL herein and Note 3 to the financial statements for more information regarding certain of these contingencies. The Company periodically evaluates its exposure to such risks and, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles,standards, records reserves for those matters where a non-tax-related loss is considered probable and reasonably estimable and records a tax asset or liability if it is more likely than not that a tax position will be sustained. The adequacy of reserves can be significantly affected by external events or conditions that can be unpredictable; thus, the ultimate outcome of such matters could materially affect the Company’s financial statements.
These events or conditions include the following:
  Changes in existing state or federal regulation by governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, control of toxic substances, hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters.
 
  Changes in existing income tax regulations or changes in IRSInternal Revenue Service (IRS) or state revenue department interpretations of existing regulations.
 
  Identification of sites that require environmental remediation or the filing of other complaints in which the Company may be asserted to be a potentially responsible party.
 
  Identification and evaluation of other potential lawsuits or complaints in which the Company may be named as a defendant.
 
  Resolution or progression of new or existing matters through the legislative process, the court systems, the IRS, state revenue departments, the FERC, or the EPA.

II-380II-399


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
Depreciation
Depreciation of the original cost of assets is computed under the straight-line method and applies a composite depreciation rate based on the assets’ estimated useful lives determined by management. The primary assets in property, plant, and equipment are power plants, all of which have an estimated composite life ranging from 2924 to 3735 years. These lives reflect a weighted average of the significant components (retirement units) that make up the plants. The Company reviews its estimated useful lives and salvage values on an ongoing basis. The results of these reviews could result in changes which could have a material impact on net income in the near term. See Note 1 to the financial statements under “Depreciation” for a discussion of changes in depreciation assumptions made by the Company effective January 1, 2008.2008 and January 1, 2009.
When property subject to composite depreciation is retired or otherwise disposed of in the normal course of business, its cost is charged to accumulated depreciation. For other property dispositions, the applicable cost and accumulated depreciation is removed from the accounts and a gain or loss is recognized.
Convertible Investment Tax Credits
Under the ARRA, certain costs related to the Nacogdoches plant construction are eligible for ITCs or cash grants. The Company has elected to receive ITCs. The credits are recorded as a deferred credit, which will be amortized over the life of the asset, and the tax basis of the asset is reduced by 50% of the credits received, resulting in a deferred tax asset. The Company has elected to recognize the tax benefit of this basis difference as a reduction to income tax expense as costs are incurred during the construction period. This basis difference will reverse and be recorded to income tax expense over the useful life of the asset once placed in service. The credits received during the year will be shown within operating activities in the consolidated statements of cash flows.
New Accounting Standards
Business CombinationsVariable Interest Entities
In December 2007,June 2009, the FASBFinancial Accounting Standards Board issued SFAS No. 141R.new guidance on the consolidation of variable interest entities, which replaces the quantitative-based risks and rewards calculation for determining whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary in a variable interest entity with an approach that is primarily qualitative, requires ongoing assessments of whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity, and requires additional disclosures about an enterprise’s involvement in variable interest entities. The Company adopted SFAS No. 141R onthis new guidance effective January 1, 2009. The adoption of SFAS No. 141R could have an impact on the accounting for any business combinations completed by the Company after January 1, 2009. Any costs incurred by the Company in assessing potential acquisitions that will close after December 31, 2008 have been expensed as incurred.
In December 2007, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 160, “Non-controlling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements” (SFAS No. 160). SFAS No. 160 amends Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51, “Consolidated Financial Statements” to establish accounting and reporting standards for the non-controlling (minority) interest in a subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a subsidiary. It clarifies that a non-controlling interest in a subsidiary should be reported as equity in the consolidated financial statements and establishes a single method of accounting for changes in a parent’s ownership interest in a subsidiary that do not result in deconsolidation. The Company adopted SFAS No. 160 on January 1, 20092010 with no material impact to theon its financial statements.
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY
Overview
The Company’s financial condition remained stable at December 31, 2008. Throughout the recent turmoil in the financial markets, the2009. The Company has maintained cash balances to coversuccessfully accessed the majority of its capital needs and has had limited need to issue commercial paper or draw on committed credit arrangements.market as needed during 2009. There was no$118.9 million of commercial paper outstanding as of December 31, 2008. Subsequent to December 31, 2008, the2009. The Company issued a small amount of overnight commercial paper. Southern Power intends to continue to monitor its access to short-term and long-term capital markets as well as its bank credit arrangements as needed to meet its future capital and liquidity needs. No changes in bank credit arrangements were experienced during 2008 although marketMarket rates for committed credit have increased and the Company may be subject to higher costs as its existing facilities are replaced or renewed. The Company experienced no material counterparty credit losses as a result of the turmoil in the financial markets. The ultimate impact on future financing costs as a result of the financial turmoil cannot be determined at this time. See “Sources of Capital” herein for additional information on lines of credit.
Net cash provided from operating activities totaled $318.1 million in 2009, increasing 20.4% from 2008. This increase is primarily due to a reduction in costs incurred on the OUC construction contract, receipt of convertible investment tax credits, and timing of tax payments. Net cash used for investing activities totaled $364.1 million in 2009, increasing 324.5% from 2008. This increase was primarily due to the Nacogdoches and West Georgia acquisitions in October 2009 and December 2009, respectively. Gross property additions to utility plant of $137.1 million in 2009 were primarily related to the construction of the Cleveland County and Nacogdoches facilities. Net cash provided from financing activities was $15.2 million in 2009, compared to $140.6 million used in 2008. This change was primarily due to the issuance of short-term debt in 2009.

II-400


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Net cash provided from operating activities totaled $264.3 million in 2008, decreasing 19.4%16.2% from 2007. This decrease is primarily due to cash outflows for engineering, procurement, and construction services to build a combined cycle unit for OUC. The OUC contract is not expected to have any positive or negative cash impacts to the Company over the term of the contract as the Company is not anticipating a profit or loss from this transaction at this time.OUC. Net cash used for investing activities totaled $85.8 million in 2008, decreasing 53.4% from 2007. This decrease was primarily due to the completion of Plant Oleander Unit 5 in 2007 and the completion of Plant Franklin Unit 3 in 2008. Gross property additions to utility plant of $50.0 million in 2008 were primarily related to the completion of Plant Franklin Unit 3. Net cash used for financing activities was $140.6 million in 2008, decreasing 14.9%12.9% from 2007. This decrease was primarily due to reduced levels of short-term debt in 2008.

II-381


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Net cash provided from operating activities totaled $315.4 million in 2007, increasing 29.8% from 2006. This increase was primarily due to the increase in sales due to favorable weather and cash received under billings for the engineering, procurement, and construction services to build a combined cycle unit for the OUC. Net cash used for investing activities totaled $183.9 million in 2007, decreasing 61% from 2006. This decrease was primarily due to the acquisition of Plants DeSoto and Rowan in June 2006 and September 2006, respectively. Gross property additions to utility plant of $139.2 million in 2007 were primarily related to the on-going construction activity at Plant Franklin Unit 3 and the completion of construction at Plant Oleander Unit 5. Net cash used for financing activities was $161.5 million in 2007 compared to $233.4 million provided to the Company in 2006. This change was primarily due to the cash proceeds of $200 million from the issuance of 30-year senior notes in 2006 and borrowings and equity contributions to finance the acquisitions of Plants DeSoto and Rowan.
Net cash provided from operating activities totaled $243.0 millionSignificant asset changes in 2006, increasing 20.6% from 2005. This increase was primarilythe balance sheet during 2009 include increases related to the West Georgia and Nacogdoches acquisitions. Construction work in progress increased due to Cleveland County and Nacogdoches construction activities. Prepaid long-term service agreements increased due to the increase in sales due to PPAs started or acquired during the period and a reductiontiming of energy revenues due to lower natural gas prices resulting in reduced working capital levels. Net cash used for investing activities totaled $474.1 million in 2006, increasing 96.6% from 2005. This increase was due primarily to the acquisition of Plants DeSoto and Rowan in June 2006 and September 2006, respectively. Net cash provided by financing activities in 2006 totaled $233.4 million, increasing 453.1% from 2005. This increase was primarilyoutage activities. Additionally, prepaid income taxes decreased due to the cash proceedstiming of $200 million fromincome tax payments. Cash decreased due to the issuance of 30-year senior notes in 2006West Georgia and borrowingsNacogdoches acquisitions and equity contributions to finance the acquisitions of Plants DeSoto and Rowan.increased construction activity.
Significant asset changes in the balance sheet during 2008 include increases in accounts receivable related to higher energy revenues due to an increase in natural gas prices, increases in prepaid long-term service agreements prepayments due to the timing of outage activities, and an increase in cash due to a reduction of investing activities of the Company in 2008 due to the completion of construction projects at Plant Oleander Unit 5 in December 2007 and Plant Franklin Unit 3 in June 2008.
Significant assetliability and stockholder’s equity changes in the balance sheet during 20072009 include lower cash balances as available amounts were used to reduce short-term debt andthe issuance of $118.9 million in notes payable, an increase in assets from risk management activities primarilyaccounts payable related to construction projects, and a decrease in net billings in excess of cost due to markthe timing of scheduled payments and costs incurred with regard to market changes on energy derivative contracts.the OUC construction contract. In 2009, the Company also paid $106.1 million in dividends to Southern Company.
Significant liability and stockholder’s equity changes in the balance sheet during 2008 include the payment of short-term debt obligations, increases in affiliate payables due to increases in natural gas and purchased power prices, a reduction of other current liabilities due to payment of IGCC termination costs, and a decrease in the net billings in excess of cost on the OUC construction contract due to on-going construction activities. In 2008, the Company also paid $94.5 million in dividends to Southern Company.
Significant liability and stockholder’s equity changes in the balance sheet during 2007 include a reduction of short-term debt, an increase in billings received in excess of costs on the OUC construction contract, and payment of $89.8 million in dividends to Southern Company.
Sources of Capital
The Company may use operating cash flows, external funds, or equity capital or loans from Southern Company to finance any new projects, acquisitions, and ongoing capital requirements. The Company expects to generate external funds from the issuance of unsecured senior debt and commercial paper or utilization of credit arrangements from banks. However, the amount, type, and timing of any financings, if needed, will depend upon regulatory approval, prevailing market conditions, and other factors.
The Company’s current liabilities frequently exceed current assets due to the use of short-term indebtedness as a funding source, as well as cash needs which can fluctuate significantly due to the seasonality of the business. To meet liquidity and capital resource requirements, at December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had $400 million of committed credit arrangements with banks that expire in 2012. There were no borrowings under this facility outstanding at December 31, 2008.2009. Proceeds from these credit arrangements may be used for working capital and general corporate purposes as well as liquidity support for the Company’s commercial paper program. See Note 6 to the financial statements under “Bank Credit Arrangements” for additional information.

II-401


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
The Company’s commercial paper program is used to finance acquisition and construction costs related to electric generating facilities and for general corporate purposes. At December 31, 2008,2009, there was no$118.9 million of commercial paper outstanding. See Note 6 to the financial statements under “Bank Credit Arrangements” for additional information.
Management believes that the need for working capital can be adequately met by utilizing cash balances, commercial paper programs, and lines of credit.

II-382


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Financing Activities
During 20082009 and 2007,2008, the Company did not issue any new long-term securities.
The issuance of all securities by the Company is generally subject to regulatory approval by the FERC. Additionally, with respect to the public offering of securities, the Company files registration statements with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (1933 Act). The amounts of securities authorized by the FERC, as well as the amounts registered under the 1933 Act, are continuously monitored and appropriate filings are made to ensure flexibility in the capital markets.
Credit Rating Risk
The Company does not have any credit arrangements that would require material changes in payment schedules or terminations as a result of a credit rating downgrade. There are certain contracts that could require collateral, but not accelerated payment, in the event of a credit rating change to BBB and Baa2, or BBB- and/or Baa3 or below. These contracts are for physical electricity purchases and sales, fuel purchases, fuel transportation and storage, and energy price risk management. At December 31, 2008,2009, the maximum potential collateral requirements under these contracts at a BBB and Baa2 rating were approximately $9 million and at a BBB- and/or Baa3 rating were approximately $334$339 million. At December 31, 2008,2009, the maximum potential collateral requirements under these contracts at a rating below BBB- and/or Baa3 were approximately $723$984 million. Included in these amounts are certain agreements that could require collateral in the event that one or more Power Poolpower pool participants has a credit rating change to below investment grade. Generally, collateral may be provided by a Southern Company guaranty, letter of credit, or cash. Additionally, any credit rating downgrade could impact the Company’s ability to access capital markets, particularly the short-term debt market.
In addition, through the acquisition of Plant Rowan, the Company assumed a PPAPPAs with Duke Energy and NCMPA1 that could require collateral, but not accelerated payment, in the event of a downgrade toof the Company’s credit ratingcredit. The Duke Energy PPA defines the downgrade to be below BBB- or Baa3. The NCMPA1 PPA requires credit assurances without stating a specific credit rating. The amount of collateral required would depend upon actual losses, if any, resulting from a credit downgrade.downgrade for both PPAs.
Market Price Risk
The Company is exposed to market risks, including changes in interest rates, certain energy-related commodity prices, and, occasionally, currency exchange rates. To manage the volatility attributable to these exposures, the Company takes advantage of natural offsets and enters into various derivative transactions for the remaining exposures pursuant to the Company’s policies in areas such as counterparty exposure and hedging practices. Company policy is that derivatives are to be used primarily for hedging purposes. Derivative positions are monitored using techniques that include market valuation and sensitivity analysis.
At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had no variable long-term debt outstanding. Therefore, there would be no effect on annualized interest expense related to long-term debt if the Company sustained a 100 basis point change in interest rates. Since a significant portion of outstanding indebtedness bears interest at fixed rates, the Company is not aware of any facts or circumstances that would significantly affect such exposures in the near term. However, the impact on future financing costs cannot be determined at this time.
Because energy from the Company’s facilities is primarily sold under long-term PPAs with tolling agreements and provisions shifting substantially all of the responsibility for fuel cost to the counterparties, the Company’s exposure to market volatility in commodity fuel prices and prices of electricity is limited. However, the Company has been and may continue to be exposed to market volatility in energy-related commodity prices as a result of sales of uncontracted generating capacity.

II-402


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
The changes in fair value of energy-related derivative contracts were as follows at December 31:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 Changes Changes Changes Changes
 Fair Value Fair Value
 (in millions) (in millions)
Contracts outstanding at the beginning of the period, assets (liabilities), net $3.4 $1.9  $3.4 $3.4 
Contracts realized or settled 1.4  (1.9)  (2.0) 1.4 
Current period changes (a)  (1.4) 3.4   (4.9)  (1.4)
Contracts outstanding at the end of the period, assets (liabilities), net $3.4 $3.4  $(3.5) $3.4 
(a) Current period changes also include the changes in fair value of new contracts entered into during the period, if any.

II-383


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Although the changeThe decreases in the fair value positions of the energy-related derivative contracts for the yearyears ended December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 was immaterial, the underlying changes are attributablewere $6.9 million and $0.0 million, respectively, which is due to both the volume and prices ofprice changes in power and natural gas positions.
The net hedge positions at December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 and respective period end dates that support these changes are as follows:
             
 December 31, December 31, December 31,
2009
 December 31,
2008
 2008 2007
Power (net sold)
  
Megawatt hours (MWH) (in millions)
 0.3 1.7 
Weighted average contract cost per MWH above (below) market prices(in dollars)
 $(2.29) $1.76 
Megawatt hours (MWH) (in millions) 2.6 0.3 
Weighted average contract cost per MWH above (below) market prices (in dollars) $(0.38) $(2.29)
Natural gas (net purchase)
  
Billion cubic feet (Bcf) 1.9 3.8 
Weighted average contract cost per British thermal unit (mmBtu) above (below) market prices (in dollars)
 $(2.16) $0.09 
Commodity – million British thermal unit (mmBtu) 9.0 1.9 
Location basis – million mmBtu 2.0  
Commodity – Weighted average contract cost per mmBtu above (below) market prices (in dollars) $0.29 $(2.16)
Location basis – Weighted average contract cost per mmBtu above (below) market prices (in dollars) $(0.04)  
At December 31, the net fair value of energy-related derivative contracts by hedge designation was reflected in the financial statements as assets/(liabilities) as follows:
                
 2008 2007
Asset (Liability) Derivatives 2009 2008
 (in millions) (in millions)
Cash flow hedges $(0.8) $0.1  $(2.5) $(0.8)
Non-accounting hedges 4.2 3.3 
Not designated  (1.0) 4.2 
Total fair value $3.4 $3.4  $(3.5) $3.4 
UnrealizedGains and losses on energy-related derivatives used by the Company to hedge anticipated purchases and sales are initially deferred in other comprehensive income before being recognized in income in the same period as the hedged transaction. Gains and losses on derivative contracts that are not designated or fail to qualify as hedges are recognized in the statements of income as incurred.
Total net unrealized pre-tax gains (losses) recognized in the statements of income for the years ended December 31, 2009 and losses fromDecember 31, 2008 for energy-related derivative contracts recognized in incomethat are not hedges were not material for any year presented.$(5.2) million and $0.9 million, respectively.

II-403


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
The maturities of the energy-related derivative contracts and the level of the fair value hierarchy in which they fall at December 31, 20082009 are as follows:
                                
 December 31, 2008 December 31, 2009
 Fair Value Measurements Fair Value Measurements
 Total Maturity Total Maturity
 Fair Value Year 1 Years 2&3 Years 4&5 Fair Value Year 1 Years 2&3 Years 4&5
 (in millions) (in millions) 
Level 1 $ $ $ $  $ $ $ $ 
Level 2 3.4 3.3 0.1    (3.5)  (3.2)  (0.4) 0.1 
Level 3          
Fair value of contracts outstanding at end of period $3.4 $3.3 $0.1 $  $(3.5) $(3.2) $(0.4) $0.1 
As part of the adoption of FASB Statement No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” to increase consistency and comparability in fair value measurements and related disclosures, the table above now uses the three-tier fair value hierarchy, as discussed in Note 8 to the financial statements, as opposed to the previously used descriptions “actively quoted,” “external sources,” and “models and other methods.” The three-tier fair value hierarchy focuses on the fair value of the contract itself, whereas the previous descriptions focused on the source of the inputs. Because the Company uses over-the-counter contracts that are not exchange traded but are fair valued using prices which are actively quoted, and thus fall into Level 2. See Note 8 to the valuations of those contracts now appear in Level 2; previously they were shown as “actively quoted.”financial statements for further discussion on fair value measurements.
The Company is exposed to market-price risk in the event of nonperformance by counterparties to energy-related derivative contracts. The Company’s practicepolicy is to enter into derivative agreements with counterparties that have investment grade credit ratings by Standard & Poor’sS&P and Moody’s or with counterparties who have posted collateral to cover potential credit exposure. Therefore, the Company does not anticipate market risk exposure from nonperformance by the counterparties. For additional information, see NotesNote 1 and 6 to the financial statements under “Financial Instruments.”

II-384


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Capital Requirements and Contractual Obligations
The capital program of the Company is currently estimated to be $748.9 million for 2009, $658.9$627.4 million for 2010, and $768.6$856.5 million for 2011.2011, and $379.0 million for 2012. These amounts include estimates for potential plant acquisitions and new construction as well as ongoing capital improvements. Planned expenditures for plant acquisitions may vary due to market opportunities and the Company’s ability to execute its growth strategy. Actual construction costs may vary from these estimates because of changes in factors such as: business conditions; environmental statutes and regulations; FERC rules and regulations; load projections; changes in legislation; the cost and efficiency of construction labor, equipment, and materials; project scope and design changes; and the cost of capital. On December 5, 2008, theThe Company announced plans to constructis currently constructing four combustion turbine units in North Carolina.Carolina and a biomass generating facility in Texas. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL — “Construction Projects” herein and Note 2 to the financial statements under “Acquisitions and Divestitures — Nacogdoches Power LLC Acquisition” for additional information.
Other funding requirements related to obligations associated with scheduled maturities of long-term debt, as well as the related interest, leases, derivative obligations, and other purchase commitments are as follows. See Notes 1, 6, 7, and 79 to the financial statements for additional information.

II-404


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Contractual Obligations
                    
 2010- 2012- After                         
 2009 2011 2013 2013 Total 2011- 2013- After Uncertain  
 (in millions) 2010 2012 2014 2014 Timing(c) Total
 (in millions)
Long-term debt(a)
  
Principal $ $ $575.0 $725.0 $1,300.0  $ $575.0 $ $725.0 $ $1,300.0 
Interest 74.3 148.6 112.6 344.4 679.9  74.3 148.6 76.7 306.1  605.7 
Energy-related derivative obligations(b)
 7.5 0.2   7.7  8.1 0.5    8.6 
Operating leases 0.4 0.8 0.8 22.3 24.3  0.6 1.0 1.0 22.3  24.9 
Purchase commitments(c)
 
Unrecognized tax benefits and interest(c)
     0.1 0.1 
Purchase commitments(d)
 
Capital(d)(e)
 748.9 1,427.5   2,176.4  627.4 1,235.5    1,862.9 
Natural gas(e)(f)
 40.6 269.0 101.0 316.2 726.8  165.8 323.9 239.5 277.6  1,006.8 
Purchased power(f)
 13.5 21.4 99.6 346.9 481.4 
Long-term service agreements(g)
 34.4 96.3 84.4 986.9 1,202.0 
Biomass fuel(g)
  17.0 35.1 127.6  179.7 
Purchased power(h)
 13.6 57.0 102.0 295.2  467.8 
Long-term service agreements(i)
 46.6 101.2 78.9 953.6  1,180.3 
Total $919.6 $1,963.8 $973.4 $2,741.7 $6,598.5  $936.4 $2,459.7 $533.2 $2,707.4 $0.1 $6,636.8 
 
(a) All amounts are reflected based on final maturity dates. The Company plans to retire higher-cost securities and replace these obligations with lower-cost capital if market conditions permit.
 
(b) For additional information, see Notes 1 and 69 to the financial statements.
 
(c)The timing related to the realization of $0.1 million in unrecognized tax benefits and interest payments cannot be reasonably and reliably estimated due to uncertainties in the timing of the effective settlement of tax positions. See Note 5 to the financial statements for additional information.
(d) The Company generally does not enter into non-cancelable commitments for other operations and maintenance expenditures. Total other operations and maintenance expenses for the last three years were $136.7 million, $147.7 million, $135.0 million, and $95.3$135.0 million, respectively.
 
(d)(e) The Company forecasts capital expenditures over a three-year period. Amounts represent estimates for potential plant acquisitions and new construction as well as ongoing capital improvements.
 
(e)(f) Natural gas purchase commitments are based on various indices at the time of delivery. Amounts reflected have been estimated based on the New York Mercantile Exchange future prices at December 31, 2008.2009.
 
(f)(g)Biomass fuel commitments are based on minimum committed tonnage of wood waste purchases for Plant Nacogdoches. Plant Nacogdoches is expected to begin commercial operation in 2012. Amounts reflected include price escalation based on inflation indices.
(h) Purchased power commitments of $71.5$35.4 million in 2012-20132011-2012, $72.9 million in 2013-2014, and $316.1$279.3 million after 20132014 will be resold under a third party agreement to EnergyUnited. The purchases will be resold at cost.
 
(g)(i) Long-term service agreements include price escalation based on inflation indices.

II-385II-405


MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
The Company’s 20082009 Annual Report contains forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements concerning environmental regulations and expenditures, financing activities, access to sources of capital, impacts of the adoption of new accounting rules, impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, estimated sales and purchases under new power sale and purchase agreements, impacts of revisions to depreciation estimates, start and completion of construction projects, plans and estimated costs for new generation resources, and estimated construction and other expenditures. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “could,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “projects,” “predicts,” “potential,” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other similar terminology. There are various factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those suggested by the forward-looking statements; accordingly, there can be no assurance that such indicated results will be realized. These factors include:
 the impact of recent and future federal and state regulatory change, including legislative and regulatory initiatives regarding deregulation and restructuring of the electric utility industry, implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, environmental laws including regulation of water quality and emissions of sulfur, nitrogen, mercury, carbon, soot, or particulate matter, and other substances, and also changes in tax and other laws and regulations to which the Company is subject, as well as changes in application of existing laws and regulations;
 
 current and future litigation, regulatory investigations, proceedings, or inquiries, including FERC matters;
 
 the effects, extent, and timing of the entry of additional competition in the markets in which the Company operates;
 
 variations in demand for electricity, including those relating to weather, the general economy and recovery from the recent recession, population and business growth (and declines), and the effects of energy conservation measures;
 
 available sources and costs of fuels;
 
 effects of inflation;
 
 advances in technology;
 
 state and federal rate regulations;
 
 the ability to control costs and avoid cost overruns during the development and construction of facilities;
 
 internal restructuring or other restructuring options that may be pursued;
 
 potential business strategies, including acquisitions or dispositions of assets or businesses, which cannot be assured to be completed or beneficial to the Company;
 
 the ability of counterparties of the Company to make payments as and when due and to perform as required;
 
 the ability to obtain new short- and long-term contracts with wholesale customers;
 
 the direct or indirect effect on the Company’s business resulting from terrorist incidents and the threat of terrorist incidents;
 
 interest rate fluctuations and financial market conditions and the results of financing efforts, including the Company’s credit ratings;
 
 the ability of the Company to obtain additional generating capacity at competitive prices;
 
 catastrophic events such as fires, earthquakes, explosions, floods, hurricanes, droughts, pandemic health events such as an avian influenza,influenzas, or other similar occurrences;
 
 the direct or indirect effects on the Company’s business resulting from incidents similar toaffecting the August 2003 power outage in the Northeast;U.S. electric grid or operation of generating resources;
 
 the effect of accounting pronouncements issued periodically by standard-setting bodies; and
 
 other factors discussed elsewhere herein and in other reports (including the Form 10-K) filed by the Company from time to time with the SEC.
The Company expressly disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

II-386II-406


CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
                        
        
 2008 2007 2006  2009 2008 2007 
 (in thousands)  (in thousands) 
  
Operating Revenues:
  
Wholesale revenues — 
Non-affiliates $667,979 $416,648 $279,384 
Affiliates 638,266 547,229 491,762 
Wholesale revenues, non-affiliates $394,366 $667,979 $416,648 
Wholesale revenues, affiliates 544,415 638,266 547,229 
Other revenues 7,296 8,137 5,902  7,870 7,296 8,137 
Total operating revenues 1,313,541 972,014 777,048  946,651 1,313,541 972,014 
Operating Expenses:
  
Fuel 424,800 238,680 145,236  232,466 424,800 238,680 
Purchased power — 
Non-affiliates 132,222 64,604 53,795 
Affiliates 195,743 135,336 116,902 
Purchased power, non-affiliates 79,355 132,222 64,604 
Purchased power, affiliates 64,587 195,743 135,336 
Other operations and maintenance 147,711 134,971 95,276  136,655 147,711 134,971 
Gain on sale of property  (6,015)   
Loss (gain) on sale of property 4,977  (6,015)  
Loss on IGCC project  17,619     17,619 
Depreciation and amortization 88,511 73,985 65,959  98,135 88,511 73,985 
Taxes other than income taxes 17,700 15,744 15,637  16,920 17,700 15,744 
Total operating expenses 1,000,672 680,939 492,805  633,095 1,000,672 680,939 
Operating Income
 312,869 291,075 284,243  313,556 312,869 291,075 
Other Income and (Expense):
  
Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized  (83,211)  (79,175)  (80,154)  (84,963)  (83,212)  (79,175)
Profit recognized on construction contract 13,296   
Other income (expense), net 7,593 3,285 2,191   (374) 7,594 3,285 
Total other income and (expense)  (75,618)  (75,890)  (77,963)  (72,041)  (75,618)  (75,890)
Earnings Before Income Taxes
 237,251 215,185 206,280  241,515 237,251 215,185 
Income taxes 92,892 83,548 81,811  85,663 92,892 83,548 
Net Income
 $144,359 $131,637 $124,469  $155,852 $144,359 $131,637 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-387II-407


CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
                       
       
 2008 2007 2006  2009 2008 2007 
 (in thousands)  (in thousands) 
  
Operating Activities:
  
Net income $144,359 $131,637 $124,469  $155,852 $144,359 $131,637 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided from operating activities —  
Depreciation and amortization 102,783 89,221 82,365 
Depreciation and amortization, total 110,427 102,783 89,221 
Deferred income taxes 70,338 31,665 33,150  22,950 70,338 31,665 
Convertible investment tax credits received 16,800   
Deferred revenues  (704)  (4,852) 2,248  2,288  (703)  (4,852)
Mark-to-market adjustments  (925)  (3,033)  (328) 5,204  (925)  (3,033)
Accumulated billings on construction contract 85,619 60,417 12,810  48,451 85,619 60,417 
Accumulated costs on construction contract  (110,096)  (29,645)  (7,198)  (46,765)  (110,096)  (29,645)
Loss on IGCC project  17,619     17,619 
Gain on sale of property  (6,015)   
Profit recognized on construction contract  (13,296)   
Loss (gain) on sale of property 4,977  (6,015)  
Other, net 4,852 7,874 2,484  5,630 4,851 7,875 
Changes in certain current assets and liabilities —            
Receivables  (11,156)  (3,155) 38,479 
Fossil fuel stock  (2,640)  (4,105)  (374)
Materials and supplies 2,773  (1,169)  (119)
Prepaid income taxes  (21,338)   
Other current assets 1,413  (1,863)  (3,003)
Accounts payable 10,451 23,028  (34,163)
Accrued taxes  (1,622) 1,474  (8,522)
Accrued interest  (252) 319 687 
Other current liabilities  (3,575)   
-Receivables  (9,717)  (11,156)  (3,155)
-Fossil fuel stock 2,738  (2,640)  (4,105)
-Materials and supplies  (5,345) 2,773  (1,169)
-Prepaid income taxes 16,296  (21,338)  
-Other current assets  (298) 1,413  (1,863)
-Accounts payable 2,043 10,451 23,027 
-Accrued taxes 88  (1,622) 1,474 
-Accrued interest 7  (252) 319 
-Other current liabilities  (199)  (3,575)  
Net cash provided from operating activities 264,265 315,432 242,985  318,131 264,265 315,432 
Investing Activities:
  
Property additions  (49,964)  (139,198)  (55,813)  (137,133)  (49,964)  (139,198)
Acquisition of plant facilities    (409,213)
Cash paid for acquisitions  (194,156)   
Sale of property 5,073    84 5,073  
Sale of property to affiliates  4,291 15,674    4,291 
Change in construction payables  (7,530)  (1,960) 10,965 
Change in construction payables, net 13,435  (7,529)  (1,960)
Payments pursuant to long-term service agreements  (31,725)  (44,471)  (35,678)  (46,120)  (31,725)  (44,471)
Other  (1,624)  (2,514)  
Other investing activities  (184)  (1,625)  (2,514)
Net cash used for investing activities  (85,770)  (183,852)  (474,065)  (364,074)  (85,770)  (183,852)
Financing Activities:
  
Increase (decrease) in notes payable, net  (49,748)  (74,004) 13,060  118,948  (49,748)  (74,004)
Proceeds — 
Senior notes   200,000 
Capital contributions 3,642 3,533 108,689 
Redemptions — 
Other long-term debt   (1,209)  (200)
Proceeds — Capital contributions 2,353 3,642 3,533 
Redemptions — Other long-term debt    (1,209)
Payment of common stock dividends  (94,500)  (89,800)  (77,700)  (106,100)  (94,500)  (89,800)
Other   (24)  (10,471)    (24)
Net cash provided from (used for) financing activities  (140,606)  (161,504) 233,378  15,201  (140,606)  (161,504)
Net Change in Cash and Cash Equivalents
 37,889  (29,924) 2,298   (30,742) 37,889  (29,924)
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Year
 5 29,929 27,631  37,894 5 29,929 
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Year
 $37,894 $5 $29,929  $7,152 $37,894 $5 
Supplemental Cash Flow Information:
  
Cash paid during the period for —           
Interest (net of $7,075, $16,541 and $5,648 capitalized, respectively) $69,716 $63,766 $65,206 
Income taxes (net of refunds) 47,611 50,724 53,608 
Interest (net of $1,624, $7,075 and $16,541 capitalized, respectively) $73,064 $69,716 $63,766 
Income taxes (net of refunds and investment tax credits) 30,220 47,611 50,724 
Noncash value of business exchanged in West Georgia acquisition 70,839   
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-388II-408


CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
At December 31, 20082009 and 20072008

Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
               
     
Assets 2008 2007  2009 2008 
 (in thousands)  (in thousands) 
  
Current Assets:
  
Cash and cash equivalents $37,894 $5  $7,152 $37,894 
Receivables —  
Customer accounts receivable 23,640 19,100  28,873 23,640 
Other accounts receivable 2,162 1,025  2,064 2,162 
Affiliated companies 33,401 27,004  38,561 33,401 
Fossil fuel stock, at average cost 17,801 15,160  15,351 17,801 
Materials and supplies, at average cost 26,527 19,284  31,607 26,527 
Prepaid service agreements — current 26,304 14,233  44,090 26,304 
Prepaid income taxes 18,066 135  5,177 18,066 
Other prepaid expenses 2,755 2,705  3,176 2,756 
Assets from risk management activities 10,799 16,079  4,901 10,799 
Other 4,533 4,226 
Other current assets 6,754 4,532 
Total current assets 203,882 118,956  187,706 203,882 
Property, Plant, and Equipment:
  
In service 2,847,757 2,534,507  2,994,463 2,847,757 
Less accumulated provision for depreciation 351,193 280,962  439,457 351,193 
 2,496,564 2,253,545 
Plant in service, net of depreciation 2,555,006 2,496,564 
Construction work in progress 8,775 283,084  153,982 8,775 
Total property, plant, and equipment 2,505,339 2,536,629  2,708,988 2,505,339 
Other Property and Investments:
 
Goodwill 1,794  
Other intangible assets, net of amortization of $17 49,102  
Total other property and investments 50,896  
Deferred Charges and Other Assets:
  
Prepaid long-term service agreements 81,542 87,058  74,513 81,542 
Other— 
Affiliated 3,827 4,138 
Other 18,550 21,993 
Other deferred charges and assets — affiliated 3,540 3,827 
Other deferred charges and assets — non-affiliated 17,410 18,550 
Total deferred charges and other assets 103,919 113,189  95,463 103,919 
Total Assets
 $2,813,140 $2,768,774  $3,043,053 $2,813,140 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-389II-409


CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
At December 31, 20082009 and 20072008
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
             
     
Liabilities and Stockholder’s Equity 2008 2007  2009 2008 
 (in thousands)  (in thousands) 
  
Current Liabilities:
  
Notes payable $ $49,748  $118,948 $ 
Accounts payable —  
Affiliated 62,732 48,475  58,493 62,732 
Other 11,278 20,322  31,128 11,278 
Accrued taxes —  
Income taxes 88 392 
Other 2,343 2,658 
Accrued income taxes 1,449 88 
Other accrued taxes 2,576 2,343 
Accrued interest 29,916 30,168  29,923 29,916 
Liabilities from risk management activities 7,452 12,639  8,119 7,452 
Billings in excess of cost on construction contract 11,907 36,384  297 11,907 
Other 224 9,523 
Other current liabilities 26 224 
Total current liabilities 125,940 210,309  250,959 125,940 
Long-Term Debt:
  
Senior notes —      
6.25% due 2012 575,000 575,000  575,000 575,000 
4.875% due 2015 525,000 525,000  525,000 525,000 
6.375% due 2036 200,000 200,000  200,000 200,000 
Unamortized debt discount  (2,647)  (2,901)  (2,393)  (2,647)
Long-term debt 1,297,353 1,297,099  1,297,607 1,297,353 
Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities:
  
Accumulated deferred income taxes 209,960 138,123  238,293 209,960 
Deferred capacity revenues — Affiliated 32,211 34,801 
Other — 
Affiliated 6,667 7,754 
Other 2,648 2,801 
Deferred convertible investment tax credits 16,800  
Deferred capacity revenues — affiliated 36,369 32,211 
Other deferred credits and liabilities — affiliated 5,651 6,667 
Other deferred credits and liabilities — non-affiliated 2,252 2,648 
Total deferred credits and other liabilities 251,486 183,479  299,365 251,486 
Total Liabilities
 1,674,779 1,690,887  1,847,931 1,674,779 
Common Stockholder’s Equity:
  
Common stock, par value $0.01 per share —  
Authorized - 1,000,000 shares  
Outstanding - 1,000 shares      
Paid-in capital 862,109 858,466  864,462 862,109 
Retained earnings 302,309 253,131  352,061 302,309 
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)  (26,057)  (33,710)  (21,401)  (26,057)
Total common stockholder’s equity 1,138,361 1,077,887  1,195,122 1,138,361 
Total Liabilities and Stockholder’s Equity
 $2,813,140 $2,768,774  $3,043,053 $2,813,140 
Commitments and Contingent Matters(See notes)
  
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-390II-410


CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMMON STOCKHOLDER’S EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31,
2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
                     
 
              Accumulated  
  Common Paid-In Retained Other Comprehensive  
  Stock Capital Earnings Income (Loss) Total
  (in thousands)
                     
Balance at December 31, 2005
   $746,243  $164,525  $(44,425) $866,343 
Net income        124,469      124,469 
Capital contributions from parent company     108,689         108,689 
Other comprehensive income (loss)           3,701   3,701 
Cash dividends on common stock        (77,700)     (77,700)
Other     1   1      2 
 
Balance at December 31, 2006
     854,933   211,295   (40,724)  1,025,504 
Net income        131,637      131,637 
Capital contributions from parent company     3,533         3,533 
Other comprehensive income (loss)           7,014   7,014 
Cash dividends on common stock        (89,800)     (89,800)
Other        (1)     (1)
 
Balance at December 31, 2007
     858,466   253,131   (33,710)  1,077,887 
Net income        144,359      144,359 
Capital contributions from parent company     3,642         3,642 
Other comprehensive income (loss)           7,653   7,653 
Cash dividends on common stock        (94,500)     (94,500)
Other     1   (681)     (680)
 
Balance at December 31, 2008
 $   $862,109  $302,309  $(26,057) $1,138,361 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2008, 2007, and 2006
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
             
 
  2008  2007  2006 
  (in thousands) 
Net income
 $144,359  $131,637  $124,469 
 
Other comprehensive income (loss):            
Qualifying hedges:            
Changes in fair value, net of tax of $351, $(558), and $(2,801), respectively  529   (842)  (4,263)
Reclassification adjustment for amounts included in net income, net of tax of $4,554, $5,244, and $3,992, respectively  7,124   7,856   7,964 
 
Total other comprehensive income (loss)  7,653   7,014   3,701 
 
Comprehensive Income
 $152,012  $138,651  $128,170 
 
                         
             
  Number of             Accumulated  
  Common           Other  
  Shares Common Paid-In Retained Comprehensive  
  Issued Stock Capital Earnings Income (Loss) Total
   (in thousands)  
                         
Balance at December 31, 2006
  1  $  $854,933  $211,295  $(40,724) $1,025,504 
Net income           131,637      131,637 
Capital contributions from parent company        3,533         3,533 
Other comprehensive income (loss)              7,014   7,014 
Cash dividends on common stock           (89,800)     (89,800)
Other           (1)     (1)
 
Balance at December 31, 2007
  1      858,466   253,131   (33,710)  1,077,887 
Net income           144,359      144,359 
Capital contributions from parent company        3,643         3,643 
Other comprehensive income (loss)              7,653   7,653 
Cash dividends on common stock           (94,500)     (94,500)
Other           (681)     (681)
 
Balance at December 31, 2008
  1      862,109   302,309   (26,057)  1,138,361 
Net income           155,852      155,852 
Capital contributions from parent company        2,353         2,353 
Other comprehensive income (loss)              4,656   4,656 
Cash dividends on common stock           (106,100)     (106,100)
 
Balance at December 31, 2009
  1  $  $864,462  $352,061  $(21,401) $1,195,122 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-391II-411


CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2009,2008, and 2007
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
             
          
  2009  2008  2007 
      (in thousands)     
             
Net income
 $155,852  $144,359  $131,637 
 
Other comprehensive income (loss):            
Qualifying hedges:            
Changes in fair value, net of tax of $(664), $351, and $(558), respectively  (1,044)  529   (842)
Reclassification adjustment for amounts included in net income, net of tax of $3,875, $4,554, and $5,244, respectively  5,700   7,124   7,856 
 
Total other comprehensive income (loss)  4,656   7,653   7,014 
 
Comprehensive Income
 $160,508  $152,012  $138,651 
 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

II-412


NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
General
Southern Power Company (the Company) is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Southern Company, which is also the parent company of four traditional operating companies, Southern Company Services, Inc. (SCS), Southern Communications Services, Inc. (SouthernLINC Wireless), Southern Company Holdings, Inc. (Southern Holdings), Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (Southern Nuclear), and other direct and indirect subsidiaries. The traditional operating companies, Alabama Power Company (APC), Georgia Power Company (GPC), Gulf Power Company (Gulf Power), and Mississippi Power Company, are vertically integrated utilities providing electric service in four Southeastern states. The Company constructs, acquires, owns, and manages generation assets and sells electricity at market-based rates in the wholesale market. SCS, the system service company, provides, at cost, specialized services to Southern Company and its subsidiary companies. SouthernLINC Wireless provides digital wireless communications for use by Southern Company and its subsidiary companies and also markets these services to the public and provides fiber cable services within the Southeast. Southern Holdings is an intermediate holding company subsidiary for Southern Company’s investments in leveraged leases and various other energy-related businesses.leases. Southern Nuclear operates and provides services to Southern Company’s nuclear power plants.
The Company is subject to regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The Company follows accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires the use of estimates, and the actual results may differ from those estimates. Certain prior years’ data presented in the financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation.
The financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its wholly-owned subsidiaries, Southern Company — Florida LLC, Oleander Power Project, LP (Oleander), DeSoto County Generating Company, LLC (DeSoto), and Southern Power Company — Orlando Gasification LLC (SPC-OG), and Nacogdoches Power LLC, which own, operate, and maintain the Company’s ownership interests in Plant Stanton Unit A and Plant Oleander, Plant DeSoto, and construct the combined cycle for the Orlando Utilities Commission (OUC), and construct a biomass generating facility, respectively. See Note 2 under “DeSoto and Rowan Acquisitions” and “Oleander“Nacogdoches Power LLC Acquisition.” All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.
Reclassifications
Certain prior years’ data presented in the financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation. These reclassifications had no effect on total assets, net income, or cash flows. The consolidated statements of income for the periods presented have been modified within the operating expenses section to combine the line items “Other operations” and “Maintenance” into a single line item entitled “Other operations and maintenance.” The consolidated statements of cash flows were modified to present a separate line item within the investing section for “Payments pursuant to long-term service agreements” previously included in “Property additions.” The balance sheet at December 31, 2007 was modified to reflect the amount of “Prepaid income taxes” previously included in “Other prepaid expenses.”
Affiliate Transactions
The Company has an agreement with SCS under which the following services are rendered to the Company at amounts in compliance with FERC regulation: general and design engineering, purchasing, accounting and statistical analysis, finance and treasury, tax, information resources, marketing, auditing, insurance and pension administration, human resources, systems and procedures, digital wireless communications, labor, and other services with respect to business and operations and power poolSouthern Company system fleet of generating units (power pool) transactions. Because the Company has no employees, all employee-related charges are rendered at amounts in compliance with FERC regulation under agreements with SCS. Costs for these services from SCS amounted to approximately $133.0 million in 2009, $207.4 million in 2008, and $125.4 million in 2007, and $77.82007. Approximately $83.1 million in 2006. Approximately2009, $87.9 million in 2008, and $74.1 million in 2007 and $59.7 million in 2006 were operations and maintenance expenses; the remainder was recorded to construction work in progress, other assets, and billings in excess of cost on construction contract. Cost allocation methodologies used by SCS were approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission prior to the repeal of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, as amended, and management believes they are reasonable. The FERC permits services to be rendered at cost by system service companies.
In 2003, the Company entered into agreements with APC and GPC under which APC and GPC operated and maintained Plants Dahlberg, Wansley, Franklin, and Harris. GPC also supplied various services for other plants. In August 2007, those agreements were terminated and replaced with service agreements under which APC and GPC provide specifically requested services to the Company. These services are billed at amounts in compliance with FERC regulation on a monthly basis and are recorded as

II-392


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
operations and maintenance expenses in the consolidated statements of income. For the periods ended December 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006,2007, billings under these agreements totaled approximately $1.4 million, $2.9 million, $9.2 million, and $7.6$9.2 million, respectively.
Total billings for all purchased power agreements (PPAs) in effect with affiliates totaled $485.1 million, $539.6 million, and $505.2 million in 2009, 2008, and $467.9 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Included in these billings were $32.2 million, $34.8$36.4 million and $36.3$32.2 million of “Deferred capacity revenues — affiliated” recorded on the balance sheets at December 31, 2008, December 31, 2007,2009 and December 31, 2006,2008, respectively. The Company and the traditional operating companies may jointly enter into various types of wholesale energy, natural gas, and certain other contracts, either directly or through SCS as agent. Each participating company may be jointly and severally liable for the obligations incurred under these agreements.

II-413


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
The Company and the traditional operating companies generally settle amounts related to the above transactions on a monthly basis in the month following the performance of such services or the purchase or sale of electricity.
In 2009, there were no material transactions involving the sale of property to affiliated companies.
In 2008, Gulf Power and APC sold turbine rotor assemblies to the Company for $9.4 million and $6.3 million, respectively. Additionally, the Company sold a turbine rotor assembly to APC for $8.2 million and sold a compressor assembly to GPC for $3.9 million. No gain or loss was recognized in the Company’s consolidated statements of income. These affiliate transactions were made in accordance with FERC and state Public Service Commission (PSC) rules and guidelines.
In 2007, the Company sold plots of land in Prattville, Alabama and Chilton County, Alabama to APC. The total sales price was $4.3 million and is recorded in “Sale of property to affiliates” on the consolidated statements of cash flows. In addition, the Company sold a turbine rotor to Gulf Power for $7.9 million. No gain or loss was recognized in the Company’s consolidated statements of income. These affiliate transactions were made in accordance with FERC and state PSC rules and guidelines.
In 2006,Acquisition Accounting
The Company has been engaged in a strategy of acquiring assets. The Company has accounted for these acquisitions under the purchase method in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Accordingly, the Company sold its membership interests in Cherokee Falls Development of South Carolina LLC to Southern Company’s nuclear development affiliate. The sales price was $15.7 million and is recorded in “Sale of property to affiliates” on the statement of cash flows. No gain or loss was recognizedhas included these operations in the Company’s consolidated financial statements from the respective date of income.acquisition. The purchase price of each acquisition was allocated to the fair value of the identifiable assets and liabilities. Any due diligence or transition costs incurred by the Company for successful or potential acquisitions after December 31, 2008 have been expensed as incurred.
Revenues
Capacity is sold at rates specified under contractual terms and is recognized at the lesser of the levelized amount or the amount billable under the contract over the respective contract periods. Energy is generally sold at market-based rates and the associated revenue is recognized as the energy is delivered. Transmission revenues and other fees are recognized as incurred as other operating revenue. Revenues are recorded on a gross basis for all full requirements PPAs. See “Financial Instruments” for additional information.
Significant portions of the Company’s revenues have been derived from certain customers pursuant to PPAs. For the year ended December 31, 2009, GPC accounted for 43.7% of total revenues, APC accounted for 6.6% of total revenues, and Sawnee Electric Membership Corporation accounted for 6.0% of total revenues. For the year ended December 31, 2008, GPC accounted for 36.5% of total revenues, Sawnee Electric Membership Corporation accounted for 6.1% of total revenues, and Flint Electric Membership Corporation accounted for 5.3% of total revenues. For the year ended December 31, 2007, GPC accounted for 45.6% of total revenues, APC accounted for 6.9% of total revenues, and Sawnee Electric Membership Corporation accounted for 5.5% of total revenues. For the year ended December 31, 2006, GPC accounted for 52.7% of total revenues, APC accounted for 8.2% of total revenues, and Flint Electric Membership Corporation accounted for 4.6% of total revenues.
The Company has a long-term contract for engineering, procurement, and construction services to build a combined cycle unit for OUC. Construction activities commenced in 2006 and are expected to be complete by the end of 2009. Revenue and costs are recognized using the percentage-of-completion method. The Company utilizes the cost-to-cost approach as this method is less subjective than relying on assessments of physical progress. The percentage of completion represents the percentage of the total costs incurred to the estimated total cost of the contract. Revenues and costs are recognized by applying this percentage to the total revenues and estimated costs of the contract.

II-393


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Fuel Costs
Fuel costs are expensed as the fuel is consumed. Fuel costs also include emissions allowances which are expensed as the emissions occur.
Income and Other Taxes
The Company uses the liability method of accounting for deferred income taxes and provides deferred income taxes for all significant income tax temporary differences. In accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertaintyaccounting standards related to the uncertainty in Income Taxes” (FIN 48),income taxes, the Company recognizes tax positions that are “more likely than not” of being sustained upon examination by the appropriate taxing authorities. See Note 5 under “Unrecognized Tax Benefits” for additional information.
Convertible Investment Tax Credits
Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, certain costs related to the Nacogdoches plant construction are eligible for investment tax credits (ITCs) or cash grants. The Company has elected to receive ITCs. The credits are recorded as a deferred credit, which will be amortized over the life of the asset, and the tax basis

II-414


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
of the asset is reduced by 50% of the credits received, resulting in a deferred tax asset. The Company has elected to recognize the tax benefit of this basis difference as a reduction to income tax expense as costs are incurred during the construction period. This basis difference will reverse and be recorded to income tax expense over the useful life of the asset once placed in service. The credits received during the year will be shown within operating activities in the consolidated statements of cash flows.
Property, Plant, and Equipment
The Company’s depreciable property, plant, and equipment consistconsists entirely of generation assets.
Property, plant, and equipment is stated at original cost. Original cost includes materials, direct labor incurred by contractors and affiliated companies, minor items of property, and interest capitalized. Interest is capitalized on qualifying projects during the development and construction period. The cost to replace significant items of property defined as retirement units is capitalized. The cost of maintenance, repairs, and replacement of minor items of property is charged to maintenance expense as incurred.
Depreciation
Depreciation of the original cost of assets is computed under the straight-line method and applies a composite depreciation rate based on the assets’ estimated useful lives determined by the Company. The primary assets in property, plant, and equipment are power plants, all of which have an estimated composite depreciable life ranging from 29-3724-35 years. These lives reflect a composite of the significant components (retirement units) that make up the plants. The Company reviews its estimated useful lives and salvage values on an ongoing basis. The results of these reviews could result in changes which could have a material impact on net income in the near term.
A depreciation study was completed and the applicable remaining plant lives and associated depreciation rates were revised in January 2008.2008 and January 2009. This change in estimate was due to revised useful life assumptions for certain components of plant in service. Depreciation rates by generating facility changed from a range of 2.8% to 3.8% to an adjusted range of 1.8% to 4.1%. in January 2008. Depreciation rates by generating facility changed to an adjusted range of 1.9% to 5.6% in January 2009. These changes increased depreciation and reduced income from continuing operations and net income by $4.6 million and $2.8 million, respectively, for 2008.2008 and $5.1 million and $3.1 million, respectively, for 2009.
When property subject to composite depreciation is retired or otherwise disposed of in the normal course of business, its cost is charged to accumulated depreciation. For other property dispositions, the applicable cost and accumulated depreciation is removed from the accounts and a gain or loss is recognized.
Asset Retirement Obligations and Other Costs of Removal
The present value of the ultimate costs for an asset’s future retirement is recorded in the period in which the liability is incurred. The costs are capitalized as part of the related long-lived asset and depreciated over the asset’s useful life.
At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company had no material liability for asset retirement obligations.
Interest Capitalized
Interest related to the construction of new facilities is capitalized in accordance with standard interest capitalization requirements per FASB Statement No. 34, “Capitalization of Interest Cost.”
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets and Intangibles
The Company evaluates long-lived assets and intangibles for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of such assets may not be recoverable. The Company’s intangible assets consist of acquired PPAs that are amortized over the term of the PPA and goodwill resulting from acquisitions. The average term of the PPAs is 20 years. The determination of whether impairment has occurred is based on an estimate of undiscounted future cash flows attributable to the assets, as compared with the carrying value of the assets. If an impairment has occurred, the

II-394


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
amount of the impairment recognized is determined by estimating the fair value of the assets and recording a loss if the carrying value is greater than the fair value. Impairment of goodwill is assessed on an annual basis. For assets identified as held for sale, the carrying value is compared to the estimated fair value less the cost to sell in order to determine if an impairment loss is required. Until the assets are disposed of, their estimated fair value is re-evaluated when circumstances or events change.

II-415


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
The amortization expense for the PPAs is as follows:
     
  Amortization
  Expense
 
  (in millions)
2010 $0.7 
2011  0.8 
2012  1.8 
2013  2.5 
2014  2.5 
2015 and beyond  40.9 
 
Total $49.2 
 
Deferred Project Development Costs
The Company capitalizes project development costs once it is determined that it is probable that a specific site will be acquired and a power plant constructed. These costs include professional services, permits, and other costs directly related to the construction of a new project. These costs are generally transferred to construction work in progress upon commencement of construction. The total deferred project development costs were $9.0 million at December 31, 2009, $8.9 million at December 31, 2008, and $8.4 million at December 31, 2007, and $1.3 million at December 31, 2006.2007.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
For purposes of the financial statements, temporary cash investments are considered cash equivalents. Temporary cash investments are securities with original maturities of 90 days or less.
Materials and Supplies
Generally, materials and supplies include the average costs of generating plant materials. Materials are charged to inventory when purchased and then expensed or capitalized to plant, as appropriate, at weighted average cost when installed.
Fuel Inventory
Fuel inventory includes the cost of oil and emissionemissions allowances. The Company maintains minimal oil levels for use at Plant Dahlberg, Plant Oleander, Plant DeSoto,Rowan, and Plant Rowan.West Georgia. Inventory is maintained using the weighted average cost method. Fuel inventory and emissions allowances are recorded at actual cost when purchased and then expensed at weighted average cost as used.
Financial Instruments
The Company uses derivative financial instruments to limit exposure to fluctuations in interest rates, the prices of certain fuel purchases, and electricity purchases and sales. All derivative financial instruments are recognized as either assets or liabilities (categorized(included in “Other” or shown separately as “Risk Management Activities”) and are measured at fair value. See Note 8 for additional information. Substantially all of the Company’s bulk energy purchases and sales contracts that meet the definition of a derivative are exemptexcluded from fair value accounting requirements because they qualify and are designated for the “normal” scope exception, and are accounted for under the accrual method. Other derivative contracts qualify as cash flow hedges of anticipated transactions. This results in the deferral of related gains and losses in other comprehensive income until the hedged transactions occur. Any ineffectiveness is recognized currently in net income. Other derivative contracts are marked to market through current period income and are recorded in the financial statement line item where they will eventually settle. See Note 6 under “Financial Instruments”9 for additional information.
The Company does not offset fair value amounts recognized for multiple derivative instruments executed with the same counterparty under a master netting arrangement. Additionally, the Company had no outstanding collateral repayment obligations or rights to reclaim collateral arising from derivative instruments recognized at December 31, 2008.2009.

II-416


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
The Company is exposed to losses related to financial instruments in the event of counterparties’ nonperformance. The Company has established controls to determine and monitor the creditworthiness of counterparties in order to mitigate the Company’s exposure to counterparty credit risk.
The Company’s financial instruments for which the carrying amounts did not equal fair value at December 31 were as follows:
         
  Carrying Amount Fair Value
  (in millions)
Long-term debt:        
2008
 $1,297  $1,270 
2007  1,297   1,298 
     

II-395


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
The fair values were based on either closing market prices (Level 1) or closing prices of comparable instruments (Level 2). See Note 8 for all other items recognized at fair value in the financial statements.
Other Income and (Expense)
Other income and (expense) includes non-operating revenues and expenses. Revenues are recognized when earned and expenses are recognized when incurred.
The Company has a long-term contract for engineering, procurement, and construction services to build a combined cycle unit for the OUC. Construction activities commenced in 2006 and were substantially completed in 2009. Billings and costs are recognized using the percentage of completion method. The Company utilizes the cost-to-cost approach as this method is less subjective than relying on assessments of physical progress. The percentage of completion represents the percentage of the total costs incurred to the estimated total cost of the contract. Billings and costs are recognized on a net basis by applying this percentage to the total revenues and estimated costs of the contract and are recorded in other income and (expense) in the consolidated statements of income. Net profit recognized under the long-term construction contract for the OUC was $13.3 million in 2009. No profit or loss was recognized in 2008 or 2007.
In 2008, the Company received a fee of $6.4 million for participating in an asset auction. The Company was not the successful bidder in the asset auction.
Interest related to the construction of new facilities is capitalized in accordance with GAAP.
Comprehensive Income
The objective of comprehensive income is to report a measure of all changes in common stock equity of an enterprise that result from transactions and other economic events of the period other than transactions with owners. Comprehensive income consists of net income, and changes in the fair value of qualifying cash flow hedges, less income taxes and reclassifications of amounts included in net income.
Other Income (Expense)
Other income (expense) includes non-operating revenues and expenses which are recognized when earned. In 2008, the Company received a fee of $6.4 million for participating in an asset auction. The Company was not the successful bidder in the asset auction.
2. ACQUISITIONS AND DIVESTITURES
OleanderNacogdoches Power LLC Acquisition
In June 2005,On October 8, 2009, the Company acquired all of the outstanding general and limited partnershipmembership interests of OleanderNacogdoches Power LLC (Nacogdoches) from subsidiariesAmerican Renewables LLC, the original developer of Constellationthe project. The Company is constructing a biomass generating plant in Sacul, Texas with an estimated capacity of 100 megawatts (MWs). The generating plant will be fueled from wood waste. Construction commenced in late 2009 and the plant is expected to begin commercial operation in 2012. The total estimated cost of the project is expected to be between $475 million and $500 million. The output of the plant is contracted under a PPA with Austin Energy Group, Inc. The resultsthat begins in 2012 and expires in 2032 or until a contractual limit of Oleander’s operations have been included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements since that date. $2.3 billion is reached. This PPA will be accounted for as an operating lease.
The Company’s acquisition of the general and limited partnership interests in Oleander was pursuant to a Purchase and Sale Agreement dated April 8, 2005, for an aggregate total costNacogdoches included cash consideration of approximately $218.1 million, including approximately $11.9 million of working capital and other adjustments. At the time of$50.1 million. The Nacogdoches acquisition Plant Oleander, a dual-fueled generating plant in Brevard County, Florida, had a nameplate capacity of 628 megawatts (MW). The Oleander acquisition wasis in accordance with the Company’s overall growth strategy.
Subsequent There are no contingent consideration arrangements and no significant assets or liabilities arising from contingencies. No goodwill was recorded as a result of this acquisition. An intangible asset related to the acquisition, the Company completed construction of Plant Oleander Unit 5 in December 2007. This unit is a combustion turbine with a nameplate capacity of 163 MW and is contracted to provide annual capacity for aassumed PPA with Austin Energy was recognized. Due diligence and transition costs for Nacogdoches were expensed as incurred and were not material. The fair value of the Florida Municipalconsideration transferred and the fair value of each major class of assets and liabilities at the acquisition date was as follows:
     
As of October 8, 2009
 
  (in millions)
Construction work in progress $16.2 
Other assets  0.1 
Intangible assets  33.8 
 
Total fair value of the membership interests in Nacogdoches $50.1 
 

II-417


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Agency from 2007 through 2027.Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
DesotoWest Georgia Generating Company, LLC Acquisition and Rowan AcquisitionsDeSoto County Generating Company, LLC Divestiture
Effective June 1, 2006,On December 17, 2009, the Company acquired all of the outstanding membership interests of West Georgia Generating Company, LLC (West Georgia) from Broadway Gen Funding, LLC (Broadway), an affiliate of LS Power. West Georgia was merged into the Company and the Company now owns a 669-MW nameplate capacity generating facility consisting of four combustion turbine natural gas generating units with oil back-up. The output from two units is contracted under PPAs with the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia (MEAG Power) and the Georgia Energy Cooperative, Inc. (GEC). The MEAG Power agreement began in 2009 and expires in 2029. The GEC agreement begins in 2010 and expires in 2030.
The Company’s acquisition of the interests in West Georgia was pursuant to an agreement which included the transfer of all the outstanding membership interests of DeSoto County Generating Company LLC (DeSoto) from a subsidiarythe Company to Broadway and the payment by the Company of Progress Energy, Inc.$144.0 million in cash consideration. The results of DeSoto’s operations have been included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements since that date. The Company’s acquisitioncarrying values of the membership interestmajor classes of assets disposed of were $2.0 million in DeSotofossil fuel stock, $1.2 million in materials and supplies, $72.1 million in property, plant and equipment, and $0.8 million in other deferred assets. The transaction was pursuant to an agreement dated May 8, 2006,treated as a like-kind exchange for an aggregate total cost of $79.7 million. DeSoto owns a dual-fired generating plant near Arcadia, Florida with a nameplate capacity of 344 MW.income tax purposes. The DeSotoWest Georgia acquisition wasis in accordance with the Company’s overall growth strategy.
Effective September 1, 2006, There are no contingent consideration arrangements and no significant assets or liabilities arising from contingencies. The goodwill arising from the Company acquired allacquisition consists largely of synergies and economies of scale from combining the outstanding membership interestsoperations of Rowan County Power, LLC (Rowan) from a subsidiary of Progress Energy, Inc. Rowan was merged into the Company and West Georgia and is expected to be tax deductible. Due diligence and transition costs for West Georgia were expensed as incurred and were not material.
The fair value of the resultsconsideration transferred and the fair value of Rowan’s operations have been included ineach major class of assets and liabilities at the acquisition date was as follows:
     
As of December 17, 2009
 
  (in millions)
Customer accounts receivable $0.4 
Fossil fuel stock  1.8 
Materials and supplies  0.9 
Property, plant, and equipment  192.4 
Other assets  2.5 
Goodwill  1.8 
Intangible assets (PPAs)  15.3 
Accounts payable  (0.3)
 
Total fair value of the membership interests in West Georgia  214.8 
 
Fair value of DeSoto interests  (70.8)
 
Cash consideration transferred $144.0 
 
Fair value amounts allocated to materials and supplies and other assets are preliminary estimates pending final application of the Company’s consolidated financial statements since that date. The Company’s acquisition of the membership interests in Rowan was pursuant to an agreement dated May 8, 2006 for an aggregate total cost of $329.5 million. Through the Rowan acquisition,accounting policies.
Revenues and expenses recognized by the Company owns a dual-fired generating plant near Salisbury, North Carolina with a nameplate capacity of 986 MW. The Rowan acquisitionfor West Georgia operations after the closing date were not material. PPA amortization expense for 2009 was in accordance with the Company’s overall growth strategy.not material.
Pro Forma Information
The following unaudited pro forma data of the Company below is unaudited andfinancial information gives effect to the Nacogdoches acquisition, the West Georgia acquisition, and the DeSoto and Rowan plant acquisitionsdivestiture as if they had occurred at January 1, 2006.as of the beginning of the periods presented. The unaudited pro forma financial information is not intended to represent or be indicative of the consolidated results of operations or financial condition of the Company that would have been reported had the acquisitions and divestiture been completed as of the dates presented nor should the information be taken as representative of any future consolidated results of operations or financial condition of the Company.
            
For the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2006
For the Twelve Months Ended December 31For the Twelve Months Ended December 31
 2009 2008
 (in thousands) (in millions)
Pro forma revenues $795,701  $957.4 $1,353.3 
Pro forma net income 118,703  151.1 146.6 

II-396II-418


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
3. CONTINGENCIES AND REGULATORY MATTERS
General Litigation Matters
The Company is subject to certain claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. In addition, the Company’s business activities are subject to extensive governmental regulation related to public health and the environment. Litigation over environmental issues and claims of various types, including property and other damage, personal injury, common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of environmental requirements such as opacity and air and water quality standards, has increased generally throughout the United States. In particular, personal injury and other claims for damages caused by alleged exposure to hazardous materials, and common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas and other emissions, have become more frequent. The ultimate outcome of such pending or potential litigation against the Company and its subsidiaries cannot be predicted at this time; however, for current proceedings not specifically reported herein, management does not anticipate that the liabilities, if any, arising from such current proceedings would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial statements.
FERC Matters
Market-Based Rate Authority
The Company has authorization from the FERC to sell power to non-affiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices. Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based contract with an affiliate.
In December 2004, the FERC initiated a proceeding to assess Southern Company’s generation dominancemarket power within its retail service territory. The ability to charge market-based rates in other markets iswas not an issue in the proceeding. Any new market-based rate sales by theany subsidiary of Southern Company in Southern Company’s retail service territory entered into during a 15-month refund period that ended in May 2006 could behave been subject to refund to a cost-based rate level.
In November 2007, the presiding administrative law judge issued an initial decision regarding the methodology to be used in the generation dominance tests. The proceedings are ongoing. The ultimate outcome of this generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined, but an adverse decision byOn December 23, 2009, Southern Company and the FERC trial staff reached an agreement in a final order couldprinciple that would resolve the proceeding in its entirety. The agreement does not reflect any finding or suggestion that the Company possessed or has exercised any market power. The agreement likewise does not require the Company to charge cost-based rates for certain wholesalemake any refunds related to sales during the 15-month refund period. Under the agreement, the Company will donate $0.2 million to nonprofit organizations in the Southern CompanyStates of Alabama and Georgia for the purpose of offsetting the electricity bills of low-income retail service territory, which may be lower than negotiated market-based rates, and could also result in total refunds of up to $0.7 million, plus interest.customers. The Company believes that thereagreement is no meritorious basis for an adverse decision in this proceeding and is vigorously defending itself in this matter.
In June 2007, the FERC issued its final rule in Order No. 697 regarding market-based rate authority. The FERC generally retained its current market-based rate standards. Responding to a number of requests for rehearing, the FERC issued Order No. 697-A on April 21, 2008 and Order No. 697-B on December 12, 2008. These orders largely affirmed its prior revision and codification of the regulations governing market-based rates for public utilities. In accordance with the orders, Southern Company submitted to the FERC an updated market power analysis on September 2, 2008 related to its continued market-based rate authority. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
On October 17, 2008, Southern Company filed with the FERC a revised market-based rate (MBR) tariff and a new cost-based rate (CBR) tariff.   The revised MBR tariff provides for a “must offer” energy auction whereby Southern Company offers all of its available energy for sale in a day-ahead auction and an hour-ahead auction with reserve prices not to exceed the CBR tariff price, after considering Southern Company’s native load requirements, reliability obligations, and sales commitments to third parties. All sales under the energy auction would be at market clearing prices established under the auction rules. The new CBR tariff provides for a cost-based price for wholesale sales of less than a year. On December 18, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the MBR tariff subject to certain revisions toreview and approval by the auction proposal. On January 21, 2009, Southern Company made a compliance filing that accepted all the conditions of the MBR tariff order. When this order becomes final, Southern Company will have 30 days to implement the wholesale auction. On December 31, 2008, the FERC issued an order conditionally accepting the CBR tariff subject to providing additional information concerning one aspect of the tariff. On January 30, 2009, Southern Company filed a response addressing the FERC inquiry to the CBR tariff order. Implementation of the energy auction in accordance with the MBR tariff order is expected to adequately mitigate going forward any presumption of market power that Southern Company may have in the Southern Company retail service territory. The timing of when the FERC may issue the final orders on the MBR and CBR tariffs and the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.

II-397


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual ReportFERC.
Intercompany Interchange Contract
The majority of the Company’s generation fleet is operated under the Intercompany Interchange Contract (IIC), as approved by the FERC. In May 2005, the FERC initiated a new proceeding to examine (1) the provisions of the IIC among the traditional operating companies, the Company, and SCS, as agent, under the terms of which the power pool of Southern PoolCompany is operated, (2) whether any parties to the IIC have violated the FERC’s standards of conduct applicable to utility companies that are transmission providers, and (3) whether Southern Company’s code of conduct defining the Company as a “system company” rather than a “marketing affiliate” is just and reasonable. In connection with the formation of the Company, the FERC authorized the Company’s inclusion in the IIC in 2000. The FERC also previously approved Southern Company’s code of conduct.
In October 2006, the FERC issued an order accepting a settlement resolving the proceeding subject to Southern Company’s agreement to accept certain modifications to the settlement’s terms andterms. Southern Company notified the FERC that it accepted the modifications. The modifications largely involve functional separation and information restrictions related to marketing activities conducted on behalf of the Company. In November 2006, Southern Company filed with the FERC a compliance plan in connection with the order. In April 2007, the FERC approved, with certain modifications, the plan submitted by Southern Company. Implementation of the plan did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements. In November 2007, Southern Company notified the FERC that the plan had been implemented. OnIn December 12, 2008, the FERC division of audits issued for public comment its final audit report pertaining to compliance implementation and related matters. No comments were submitted challenging the audit report’s findings were submitted. Aof Southern Company’s compliance. The proceeding remains open pending a decision is now pending from the FERC. The Company’s cost of implementingFERC regarding the plan, including the modifications, is approximately $7.0 million annually. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.audit report.

II-419


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Carbon Dioxide Litigation
OnKivalina Case
In February, 26, 2008, the Native Village of Kivalina and the City of Kivalina filed a suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against several electric utilities (including Southern Company), several oil companies, and a coal company. The plaintiffs are the governing bodies of an Inupiat village in Alaska. The plaintiffs contend that the village is being destroyed by erosion allegedly caused by global warming that the plaintiffs attribute to emissions of greenhouse gases by the defendants. The plaintiffs assert claims for public and private nuisance and contend that some of the defendants have acted in concert and are therefore jointly and severally liable for the plaintiffs’ damages. The suit seeks damages for lost property values and for the cost of relocating the village, which is alleged to be $95 million to $400 million. On June 30, 2008, all defendants filed motions to dismiss this case. Southern Company believes that these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. On September 30, 2009, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss the case based on lack of jurisdiction and ruled the claims were barred by the political question doctrine and by the plaintiffs’ failure to establish the standard for determining that the defendants’ conduct caused the injury alleged. On November 5, 2009, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit challenging the district court’s order dismissing the case. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
Other Litigation
Common law nuisance claims for injunctive relief and property damage allegedly caused by greenhouse gas emissions have become more frequent, and courts have recently determined that private parties and states have standing to bring such claims. For example, on October 16, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi’s dismissal of private party claims against certain oil, coal, chemical, and utility companies alleging damages as a result of Hurricane Katrina. In reversing the dismissal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that plaintiffs have standing to assert their nuisance, trespass, and negligence claims and none of these claims are barred by the political question doctrine. The Company is not currently a party to this litigation but was named as a defendant in an amended complaint which was rendered moot in August 2007 by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi when such court dismissed the original matter. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be determined at this time.
4. JOINT OWNERSHIP AGREEMENTS
Plant Stanton A
The Company is a 65% owner of Plant Stanton A, a combined-cycle project with a nameplate capacity of 630 MW.MWs. The unit is co-owned by the OUC (28%), Florida Municipal Power Agency (3.5%), and Kissimmee Utility Authority (3.5%). The Company has a service agreement with SCS whereby SCS is responsible for the operation and maintenance of Plant Stanton A. As of December 31, 2008, $150.92009, $151.2 million was recorded in plant in service with associated accumulated depreciation of $14.1$19.8 million. These amounts represent the Company’s share of the total plant assets and each owner must provide its own financing. The Company’s proportionate share of Plant Stanton A’s operating expense is included in the corresponding operating expenses in the statements of income.
Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)
In December 2005, the Company and OUC executed definitive agreements for development of a 285-MW IGCC project in Orlando, Florida. The definitive agreements provided that the Company would own at least 65% of the gasifier portion of the IGCC project. OUC would own the remainder of the gasifier portion and 100% of the combined cycle portion of the IGCC project. The Company signed cooperative agreements with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) that provided up to $293.75 million in grant funding for the gasification portion of this project. The IGCC project was expected to begin commercial operation in 2010. Due to continuing uncertainty surrounding potential state regulations relating to greenhouse gas emissions, the Company and OUC mutually agreed to terminate the construction of the gasifier portion of the IGCC project in November 2007. The Company has continued construction of the gas-fired combined cycle generating facility for OUC. The Company recorded a loss in the fourth quarter 2007 of approximately $17.6 million related to cancellation of the gasifier portion of the IGCC project. This amount is net of reimbursements from OUC and the DOE. This loss consists of the write-off of construction costs of $14.0 million and an accrual for termination costs of $3.6 million.

II-398


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
All termination costs were paid in 2008. As part of the termination agreement with OUC, the Company agreed to sell a tract of land in Orange County, Florida to OUC. The Company recorded a gain of $6 million on this sale in 2008.
5. INCOME TAXES
Southern Company files a consolidated federal income tax return and combined tax returns for the State of Georgia, the State of Alabama, and the State of Mississippi. Under a joint consolidated income tax allocation agreement, each subsidiary’s current and deferred tax expense is computed on a stand-alone basis, and no subsidiary is allocated more expense than would be paid if it filed a separate income tax return. In accordance with Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regulations, each company is jointly and severally liable for the tax liability.

II-420


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Current and Deferred Income Taxes
Details of income tax provisions are as follows:
            
             2009 2008 2007
 2008 2007 2006
 (in thousands) (in millions)
Federal —  
Current $18,948 $42,841 $39,653  $55.0 $18.9 $42.8 
Deferred 57,194 26,808 26,915  19.3 57.2 26.8 
 76,142 69,649 66,568  74.3 76.1 69.6 
State —  
Current 3,605 9,042 9,008  7.7 3.6 9.0 
Deferred 13,145 4,857 6,235  3.7 13.2 4.9 
 16,750 13,899 15,243  11.4 16.8 13.9 
Total $92,892 $83,548 $81,811  $85.7 $92.9 $83.5 
The tax effects of temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and their respective tax bases, which give rise to deferred tax assets and liabilities, are as follows:
                
 2008 2007 2009 2008
 (in thousands)
Deferred tax liabilities— Accelerated depreciation and other property basis differences $274,098 $209,036 
Book/tax basis difference on asset transfers 4,312 4,564 
 (in millions)
Deferred tax liabilities— 
Accelerated depreciation and other property basis differences $303.9 $274.1 
Basis difference on asset transfers 3.9 4.3 
Other 2,493    2.5 
Total 280,903 213,600  307.8 280.9 
Deferred tax assets— Federal effect of state deferred taxes 12,910 8,459 
Book/tax basis differences on asset transfers 7,962 9,027 
Deferred tax assets— 
Federal effect of state deferred taxes 13.7 12.9 
Basis difference on convertible investment tax credits 2.9  
Basis differences on asset transfers 6.7 7.9 
Other comprehensive loss on interest rate swaps 32,386 33,966  28.1 32.4 
Levelized capacity revenues 14,279 14,166  15.2 14.3 
Other  9,859  1.7  
Total 67,537 75,477  68.3 67.5 
Total deferred tax liabilities, net 213,366 138,123  239.5 213.4 
Portion included in prepaid income taxes  (3,406)  
Portion included in current income taxes  (1.2)  (3.4)
Accumulated deferred income taxes in the balance sheets $209,960 $138,123  $238.3 $210.0 
Deferred tax liabilities are the result of property related timing differences. The transfer of the Plant McIntosh construction project to GPC in 2004 resulted in a deferred gain for federal income tax purposes. GPC is reimbursing the Company for the related tax liability balance of $4.3$3.9 million. Of this total, $0.5$0.4 million is included in the balance sheets in “Receivables Affiliated companies” and the remainder is included in “Deferred Charges“Other deferred charges and Other Assets: Other – Affiliated.assets — affiliated.
Deferred tax assets consist primarily of timing differences related to the recognition of capacity revenues and the deferred loss on interest rate swaps reflected in other comprehensive income. The transfer of Plants Dahlberg, Wansley, and Franklin to the Company from GPC in 2001 also resulted in a deferred gain for federal income tax purposes. The Company will reimburse GPC for the related

II-399


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
tax asset of $8.0$6.7 million. Of this total, $1.3$1.0 million is included in the balance sheets in “Accounts payable Affiliated” and the remainder is included in “Deferred Credits“Other deferred credits and Other Liabilities: Other – Affiliated.liabilities — affiliated.

II-421


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Effective Tax Rate
A reconciliation of the federal statutory tax rate to the effective income tax rate is as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 2006 2009 2008 2007
Federal statutory rate  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%  35.0%
State income tax, net of federal deduction 4.6 4.2 4.8  3.1 4.6 4.2 
ITC basis difference  (1.2)   
Other  (0.4)  (0.4)  (0.1)  (1.4)  (0.4)  (0.4)
Effective income tax rate  39.2%  38.8%  39.7%  35.5%  39.2%  38.8%
The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 created a tax deduction for a portion of income attributable to U.S. production activities as defined in the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, Section 199 (production activities deduction). The deduction is equal to a stated percentage of qualified production activities net income. The percentage is phased in over the years 2005 through 2010 with a 3% rate applicable to the years 2005 and 2006, a 6% rate applicable for the years 2007 through 2009, and a 9% rate thereafter. This increase from 3% in 2006 to 6% in 2007 was one of several factors that increased the Company’s 2007 deduction by $1.2 million over the 2006 deduction. The resulting additional tax benefit was $0.4 million. The IRS has not clearly defined a methodology for calculating this deduction. However, Southern Company has agreedreached an agreement with the IRS on a calculation methodology and signed a closing agreement onin December 11, 2008. Therefore, in 2008, the Company reversed the unrecognized tax benefit related to the calculation methodology and adjusted the deduction for all previous years to conform to the agreement which resulted in a decrease in the 2008 deduction when compared to the 2007 deduction. Certain aspects of the production activities deduction remain unresolved. The net impact of the reversal of the unrecognized tax benefits combined with the application of the new methodology had no material effect on the Company’s financial statements.
Convertible ITCs received in 2009 for the construction of Plant Nacogdoches were $16.8 million; the tax benefit of the basis difference reduced income tax expense by $2.9 million. See Note 1 under “Summary of Significant Accounting Policies — Convertible Investment Tax Credits” for additional information.
Unrecognized Tax Benefits
FIN 48 requires companies to determine whether it is “more likely than not” that a tax position will be sustained upon examination by the appropriate taxing authorities before any part of the benefit can be recorded in the financial statements. It also provides guidance on the recognition, measurement, and classification of income tax uncertainties, along with any related interest and penalties. For 2008,2009, the total amount of unrecognized tax benefits decreased $0.9$0.4 million, resulting in a balance of $0.5$0.1 million as of December 31, 2008.2009.
Changes during the year in unrecognized tax benefits were as follows:
                    
 2008 2007 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions) 
Unrecognized tax benefits at beginning of year $1.4 $0.2  $0.5 $1.4 $0.2 
Tax positions from current periods 0.3 0.4  0.3 0.3 0.4 
Tax positions from prior periods 0.1 0.8   (0.7) 0.1 0.8 
Reductions due to settlements  (1.3)     (1.3)  
Reductions due to expired statute of limitations       
Balance at end of year $0.5 $1.4  $0.1 $0.5 $1.4 
The reduction duetax positions from the current periods increase for 2009 relate primarily to settlements relates to the agreement with the IRS regarding the production activities deduction methodology.tax position and other miscellaneous uncertain tax positions. The tax positions decrease from prior periods for 2009 relates primarily to the production activities deduction tax position. See “Effective Tax Rate” above for additional information.
Impact on the Company’s effective tax rate, if recognized, is as follows:
                        
 2008 2007 Change 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions)  (in millions)
Tax positions impacting the effective tax rate $0.5 $1.4 $0.9  $0.1 $0.5 $1.4
Tax positions not impacting the effective tax rate        
Balance of unrecognized tax benefits $0.5 $1.4 $0.9  $0.1 $0.5 $1.4

II-400II-422


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
Accrued interest for unrecognized tax benefits:benefits was as follows:
                    
 2008 2007 2009 2008 2007
 (in millions) (in millions)
Interest accrued at beginning of year $0.1 $  $  $0.1 $ 
Interest reclassified due to settlements  (0.1)     (0.1)   
Interest accrued during the year  0.1    0.1 
Balance at end of year $ $0.1  $ $ $0.1 
The Company classifies interest on tax uncertainties as interest expense. The Company did not accrue any penalties on uncertain tax positions.
It is reasonably possible that the amount of the unrecognized benefit with respect to a majority of the Company’s unrecognized tax positions will increase or decrease within the next 12 months. The possible conclusion or settlement of state audits could impact the balances significantly. At this time, an estimate of the range of reasonably possible outcomes cannot be determined.
The IRS has audited and closed all tax returns prior to 2004. The audits for the state returns have either been concluded, or the statute of limitations has expired, for years prior to 2002.
It is reasonably possible that the amount of the unrecognized benefit with respect to a majority of the Company’s unrecognized tax positions will increase or decrease within the next 12 months. At this time, an estimate of the range of reasonably possible outcomes cannot be determined.2006.
6. FINANCING
Senior Notes
In 20082009 and 2007,2008, the Company did not issue any long-term debt securities. Long-term debt outstanding was $1.3 billion at December 31, 20082009 and 2007. The Company issued $200 million aggregate principal amount of unsecured 30-year senior notes in 2006. The proceeds of the issuance were used to repay a portion of the Company’s short-term indebtedness and for other general corporate purposes, including the Company’s construction program.2008.
Bank Credit Arrangements
The Company has a $400 million unsecured syndicated revolving credit facility (Facility) expiring in July 2012. The purpose of the Facility is to provide liquidity support to the Company’s commercial paper program and for other general corporate purposes. There were no borrowings outstanding under the Facility at December 31, 2009 and 2008. Outstanding borrowings under the Facility at December 31, 2007 were $13.0 million.
The Company is required to pay a commitment fee on the unused balance of the Facility. This fee is less than1/8 of 1%. In 20082009 and 2007,2008, the Company incurred approximately $0.4 million and $0.4 million, respectively, in expenses from commitment fees under the Facility.
During 2008, the Company borrowed under the Facility and also borrowed under uncommitted facilities. For the year ended December 31, 2008, the peak balance outstanding was $95 million. The average amount outstanding was $13.3 million in 2008. The average annual interest rate was 3.2%. At December 31, 2008, there were no outstanding balances.
The Facility contains a covenant that limits the ratio of debt to capitalization (each as defined in the Facility) to a maximum of 65%. The Facility also contains a cross default provision that would be triggered if the Company defaulted on other indebtedness above a specified threshold. As of December 31, 2008,2009, the Company was in compliance with all such covenants.
The Company has established a commercial paper program. For the year ended December 31, 2008,2009, the peak commercial paper balance outstanding was $103.2$118.9 million. The average amount outstanding was $38.2$6.6 million in 2008.2009. The average annual interest rate was 3.5%0.4%. At December 31, 2009, the commercial paper program had $118.9 million outstanding. At December 31, 2008, the commercial paper program had no outstanding balances. The outstanding balance at December 31, 2007 was $36.7 million at a weighted average interest rate of 5.7%.

II-401


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Dividend Restrictions
The Company can only pay dividends to Southern Company out of retained earnings or paid-in-capital.
The Facility and the indenture related to certain series of the Company’s senior notes also contain certain limitations on the payment of common stock dividends. No dividends may be paid unless, as of the end of any calendar quarter, the Company’s projected cash flows from fixed priced capacity PPAs are at least 80% of total projected cash flows for the next 12 months or the Company’s debt to capitalization ratio is no greater than 60%. At December 31, 2008,2009, the Company was in compliance with these ratios and had no other restrictions on its ability to pay dividends.

II-423


Financial Instruments
TheNOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company enters into energy-related derivatives to hedge exposures to electricity, gas, and other fuel price changes. The Company’s exposure to market volatility in commodity fuel prices and prices of electricity is limited because its long-term sales contracts shift substantially all fuel cost responsibility to the purchaser. However, the Company has been exposed to market volatility in energy-related commodity prices as a result of sales of uncontracted generating capacity. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, the net fair value of energy-related derivative contracts by hedge designation was reflected in the financial statements as assets/(liabilities) as follows:
         
  2008 2007
  (in thousands)
Cash flow hedges $(768) $78 
Non-accounting hedges  4,187   3,293 
 
Total fair value $3,419  $3,371 
 
Gains and losses on energy-related derivative contracts that are not designated or fail to qualify as hedges are recognized in the statements of income as incurred. Gains and losses on energy-related derivatives designated as cash flow hedges are mainly used to hedge anticipated purchases and sales and are initially deferred in other comprehensive income before being recognized in income in the same period as the hedged transaction. The pre-tax gains/(losses) reclassified from other comprehensive income to revenue and fuel expense were not material for any period presented and are not expected to be material for 2009. Additionally, no material ineffectiveness was recorded in earnings for any period presented. The Company has energy-related hedges in place through 2010. At December 31, 2008, there were approximately $10.9 million of deferred pre-tax realized net hedging gains relating to capitalized costs and revenues during the construction of specific plants. This will be reclassified from other comprehensive income to depreciation and amortization over the remaining life of the respective plants, which ranges from approximately 25 to 31 years. For any year presented, the pre-tax gains reclassified from other comprehensive income to depreciation and amortization have been immaterial.
At December 31, 2008, the Company had no interest derivatives outstanding. The Company has deferred pre-tax realized losses totaling $53.1 million in other comprehensive income that will be amortized to interest expense through 2016. For the years 2008, 2007, and 2006, approximately $12.0 million, $13.3 million, and $12.0 million, respectively, of pre-tax losses were reclassified from other comprehensive income to interest expense. DuringSubsidiary Companies 2009 approximately $10.1 million of pre-tax losses are expected to be reclassified from other comprehensive income to interest expense.
All derivative financial instruments are recognized as either assets or liabilities and are measured at fair value. See Note 8 for additional information.Annual Report
7. COMMITMENTS
Expansion Program
The capital program of the Company is currently estimated to be $748.9 million for 2009, $658.9$627.4 million for 2010, and $768.6$856.5 million for 2011.2011, and $379.0 million for 2012. These amounts include estimates for potential plant acquisitions and new construction as well as ongoing capital improvements. Planned expenditures for plant acquisitions may vary due to market opportunities and the Company’s ability to execute its growth strategy. Actual construction costs may vary from these estimates because of changes in factors such as: business conditions; environmental statutes and regulations; FERC rules and regulations; load projections; changes in legislation; the cost and efficiency of construction labor, equipment, and materials; project scope and design changes; and the cost of capital.

II-402


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Long-Term Service Agreements
The Company has entered into Long-Term Service Agreements (LTSAs) with General Electric and Siemens AG for the purpose of securing maintenance support for its combined cycle and combustion turbine generating facilities. In summary, the LTSAs provide that the vendors will perform all planned inspections and certain unplanned maintenance on the covered equipment, which includes the cost of all labor and materials.
Scheduled payments to the vendors, which are subject to price escalation, are made at various intervals based on actual operating hours or number of gas turbine starts of the respective units. Total remaining payments to the vendors under these agreements are currently estimated at $1.2 billion over the remaining term of the agreements, which may range up to 2824 years. However, the LTSAs contain various cancellation provisions at the Company’s and the applicable vendor’s option. In the event of cancellation prior to scheduled work being performed, the Company is entitled to a refund of amounts paid as calculated in accordance with termination provisions of the agreements.
Payments made to the vendors prior to the performance of any planned inspections or unplanned maintenance are recorded as a prepayment in current assets or deferred charges and other assets on the balance sheets and are recorded as payments pursuant to long-term service agreements in the statementstatements of cash flows. Inspection and maintenance costs are capitalized or charged to expense based on the nature of the work when performed. These transactionsperformed and are non-cash and are not reflected in the statements of cash flows.
Fuel and Purchased Power Commitments
SCS, as agent for the traditional operating companies and the Company, has entered into various fuel transportation and procurement agreements to supply a portion of the fuel (primarily natural gas) requirements for the operating facilities. In most cases, these contracts contain provisions for firm transportation costs, storage costs, minimum purchase levels, and other financial commitments.
Natural gas purchase commitments contain givenfixed volumes with prices based on various indices at the actual time of delivery; amounts included in the chart below represent estimates based on the New York Mercantile Exchange future prices at December 31, 2008.2009. Also, the Company has entered into various long-term commitments for the purchase of biomass fuel for the biomass generating plant being constructed by the Company and for the purchase of electricity.
Total estimated minimum long-term obligations at December 31, 20082009 were as follows:
                    
 Natural Gas Purchased Power Natural Gas Biomass Fuel Purchased Power
 Commitments Commitments(a) Commitments Commitments Commitments(a)
 (in millions) (in millions) 
2009 $40.6 $13.5 
2010 139.7 13.6  $165.8 $ $13.6 
2011 129.3 7.8  182.4  7.8 
2012 50.1 49.2  141.5 17.0 49.2 
2013 50.9 50.4  129.6 17.4 50.4 
2014 and beyond 316.2 346.9 
2014 109.9 17.7 51.6 
2015 and beyond 277.6 127.6 295.2 
Total $726.8 $481.4  $1,006.8 $179.7 $467.8 
(a) Represents contractual capacity payments.
Additional commitments for fuel will be required to supply the Company’s future needs.

II-424


Notes (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidary Companies 2009 Annual Report
During 2008, the Company entered into agreements to purchase 452 MWMWs of power from three counterparties. Approximately 352 MWMWs of these commitment obligations will be used to serve the Company’s requirements service customers. Another power purchase agreement for 100 MWMWs will be resold to EnergyUnited Electric Membership Corporation (EnergyUnited) at cost for the period 2012 through 2021. The purchase power commitments for the EnergyUnited agreement are $35.4 million in 2012, $36.1 million in 2013, and $316.1$36.8 million in 2014, and $279.3 million in 2015 and beyond.
In addition, the Company has entered into an agreement to purchase power of up to 200 MWMWs at the discretion of the counterparty for the period 2011 through 2018. There is no contractual capacity payment required under this agreement. Additionally, for all amounts purchased under this arrangement, the Company will pay the counterparty an amount per MW which approximates the Company’s cost.

II-403


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2008 Annual Report
Acting as an agent for all of Southern Company’s traditional operating companies and the Company, SCS may enter into various types of wholesale energy and natural gas contracts. Under these agreements, each of the traditional operating companies and the Company may be jointly and severally liable. The creditworthiness of the Company is currently inferior to the creditworthiness of the traditional operating companies; therefore, Southern Company has entered into keep-well agreements with each of the traditional operating companies to ensure they will not subsidize nor be responsible for any costs, losses, liabilities, or damages resulting from the inclusion of the Company as a contracting party under these agreements.
Operating Leases
The Company has operating lease agreements with various terms and expiration dates. Total operating lease expenses were $0.5 million, $0.5 million, and $0.6$0.5 million for 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006,2007, respectively. The majority of the lease expense amounts and committed future expenditures are with a joint owner of Plant Stanton Unit A.
At December 31, 2008,2009, estimated minimum rental commitments for noncancelable operating leases were as follows:
        
 Operating Lease Operating Lease
 Commitments Commitments
 (in millions) (in millions)
2009 $0.4 
2010 0.4  $0.6 
2011 0.4  0.5 
2012 0.4  0.5 
2013 0.4  0.5 
2014 and beyond 22.3 
2014 0.5 
2015 and beyond 22.3 
Total $24.3  $24.9 
8. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
On January 1, 2008, the Company adopted FASB Statement No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (SFAS No. 157) which defines fairFair value establishes a framework for measuring fair value, and requires additional disclosures about fair value measurements. The criterion that is set forth in SFAS No. 157 is applicable to fair value measurement where it is permitted or required under other accounting pronouncements.
SFAS No. 157 defines fair value as the exit price, which is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The fair value measurement ismeasurements are based on inputs of observable and unobservable market data that a market participant would use in pricing the asset or liability. The use of observable inputs is maximized where available and the use of unobservable inputs is minimized for fair value measurement. As a means to illustrate the inputs used, SFAS No. 157 establishesmeasurement and reflects a three-tier fair value hierarchy that prioritizes inputs to valuation techniques used for fair value measurement.
  Level 1 consists of observable market data in an active market for identical assets or liabilities.
 
  Level 2 consists of observable market data, other than that included in Level 1, that is either directly or indirectly observable.
 
  Level 3 consists of unobservable market data. The input may reflect the assumptions of the Company of what a market participant would use in pricing an asset or liability. If there is little available market data, then the Company’s own assumptions are the best available information. The need to use unobservable inputs would typically apply to long-term energy-related derivative contracts and generally results from the nature of the energy industry, as each participant forecasts its own power supply and demand and those of other participants, which directly impact the valuation of each unique contract.
In the case of multiple inputs being used in a fair value measurement, the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement represents the level in the fair value hierarchy in which the fair value measurement is reported.
The adoption of SFAS No. 157 has not resulted in any significant changes to the methodologies used for fair value measurement.

II-404II-425


NOTESNotes (continued)
Southern Power Company and SubsidiarySubsidary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
The fair value measurements performed on a recurring basis and the level of the fair value hierarchy in which they fall at December 31, 20082009 are as follows:
                 
At December 31, 2008: Level 1Level 2Level 3 Total
  (in millions)
Assets:                
Energy-related derivatives $  $11.1  $  $11.1 
Cash equivalents  37.9         37.9 
 
Total fair value $37.9  $11.1  $  $49.0 
 
Liabilities:                
Energy-related derivatives total fair value $  $7.7  $  $7.7 
 
                 
  Fair Value Measurements Using  
  Quoted Prices      
  in Active Significant    
  Markets for Other Significant  
  Identical Observable Unobservable  
  Assets Inputs Inputs  
As of December 31, 2009: (Level 1) (Level 2) (Level 3) Total
 (in millions)
Assets:                
Energy-related derivatives $  $5.1  $  $5.1 
 
Liabilities:                
Energy-related derivatives $  $8.6  $  $8.6 
 
Energy-related derivatives primarily consist of over-the-counter contracts. See Note 6 under “Financial Instruments”9 for additional information. The cash equivalents consist of securities with original maturities of 90 days or less. All of these financial instruments and investments are valued primarily using the market approach.
As of December 31, 2009, other financial instruments for which the carrying amount did not equal fair value were as follows:
         
  Carrying Amount Fair Value
  (in millions)
Long-term debt:        
2009
 $1,298  $1,379 
2008  1,297   1,270 
9. DERIVATIVES
The Company is exposed to market risks, primarily commodity price risk and interest rate risk. To manage the volatility attributable to these exposures, the Company nets its exposures, where possible, to take advantage of natural offsets and enters into various derivative transactions for the remaining exposures pursuant to the Company’s policies in areas such as counterparty exposure and risk management practices. The Company’s policy is that derivatives are to be used primarily for hedging purposes and mandates strict adherence to all applicable risk management policies. Derivative positions are monitored using techniques including, but not limited to, market valuation, value at risk, stress testing, and sensitivity analysis. Derivative instruments are recognized at fair value in the balance sheets as either assets or liabilities.
Energy-Related Derivatives
The Company enters into energy-related derivatives to hedge exposures to electricity, gas, and other fuel price changes. The Company has limited exposure to market volatility in commodity fuel prices and prices of electricity because its long-term sales contracts shift substantially all fuel cost responsibility to the purchaser. However, the Company has been and may continue to be exposed to market volatility in energy-related commodity prices as a result of sales of uncontracted generating capacity.
To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in electricity prices, the Company enters into physical fixed-price or heat rate contracts for the purchase and sale of electricity through the wholesale electricity market. To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in gas prices, the Company may enter into fixed-price contracts for natural gas purchases; however, a significant portion of contracts are priced at market.
Energy-related derivative contracts are accounted for in one of two methods:
Cash Flow Hedges– Gains and losses on energy-related derivatives designated as cash flow hedges are used to hedge anticipated purchases and sales and are initially deferred in other comprehensive income (OCI) before being recognized in income in the same period as the hedged transactions are reflected in earnings.
Not Designated– Gains and losses on energy-related derivative contracts that are not designated or fail to qualify as hedges are recognized in the statements of income as incurred.

II-426


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
Some energy-related derivative contracts require physical delivery as opposed to financial settlement, and this type of derivative is both common and prevalent within the electric industry. When an energy-related derivative contract is settled physically, any cumulative unrealized gain or loss is reversed and the contract price is recognized in the respective line item representing the actual price of the underlying goods being delivered.
At December 31, 2009, the net volume of energy-related derivative contracts for power and natural gas positions for the Company, together with the longest hedge date over which the Company is hedging its exposure to the variability in future cash flows for forecasted transactions and the longest date for derivatives not designated as hedges, were as follows:
                     
Power Gas
Net Sold Longest Longest Net Longest Longest
Megawatt- Hedge Non-Hedge Purchased Hedge Non-Hedge
hours Date Date mmBtu Date Date
(in millions)         (in millions)        
2.6  2010   2010   11*  2012   2014 
*Includes location basis of 2 million British thermal units (mmBtu).
For cash flow hedges, the amounts expected to be reclassified from OCI to revenue and fuel expense for the next 12-month period ending December 31, 2010 are losses of $1.1 million and $1.0 million, respectively.
Interest Rate Derivatives
The Company also enters into interest rate derivatives from time to time, which include forward-starting interest rate swaps, to hedge exposure to changes in interest rates. Derivatives related to existing variable rate securities or forecasted transactions are accounted for as cash flow hedges, where the fair value gains or losses are recorded in OCI and are reclassified into earnings at the same time the hedged transactions affect earnings. The derivatives employed as hedging instruments are structured to minimize ineffectiveness. At December 31, 2009, there were no interest rate derivatives outstanding.
The estimated pre-tax loss that will be reclassified from OCI to interest expense for the next 12-month period ending December 31, 2010 is $10.7 million. The Company has deferred gains and losses that are expected to be amortized into earnings through 2016.
Derivative Financial Statement Presentation and Amounts
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the fair value of energy-related derivatives was reflected in the balance sheets as follows:
                     
  Asset Derivatives Liability Derivatives
Derivative Category Balance Sheet
Location
 2009 2008 Balance Sheet
Location
 2009 2008
    (in millions)   (in millions)
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments in cash flow hedges
                    
Energy-related derivatives: Assets from risk
management activities
 $3.2  $  Liabilities from risk
management activities
 $5.3  $0.6 
  Other deferred charges and assets — non-affiliated       Other deferred credits and
liabilities — non-affiliated
  0.4   0.2 
 
Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments in cash flow hedges
   $3.2  $    $5.7  $0.8 
 
                     
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments
                    
Energy-related derivatives: Assets from risk
management activities
 $1.7  $10.8  Liabilities from risk
management activities
 $2.8  $6.9 
  Other deferred charges and
assets — non-affiliated
  0.2   0.3  Other deferred credits and
liabilities — non-affiliated
  0.1    
 
Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments
   $1.9  $11.1    $2.9  $6.9 
 
                     
Total
   $5.1  $11.1    $8.6  $7.7 
 

II-427


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
All derivative instruments are measured at fair value. See Note 8 for additional information.
For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, the pre-tax effect of energy-related derivatives and interest rate derivatives designated as cash flow hedging instruments on the statements of income were as follows:
                           
  Gain (Loss) Recognized in Gain (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated OCI into Income
Derivatives in Cash Flow OCI on Derivative (Effective Portion)
Hedging Relationships (Effective Portion)   Amount
Derivative Category 2009 2008 2007 Statements of IncomeLocation 2009 2008 2007
      (in millions)           (in millions)    
Energy-related derivatives $(1.7) $0.9  $(1.4) Fuel $  $  $(0.1)
              Amortization and Depreciation  0.4   0.4   0.4 
Interest rate derivatives          Interest expense  (10.0)  (12.0)  (13.4)
 
Total $(1.7) $0.9  $(1.4)   $(9.6) $(11.6) $(13.1)
 
There was no material ineffectiveness recorded in earnings for any period presented.
For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, the pre-tax effect of energy-related derivatives not designated as hedging instruments on the statements of income were as follows:
               
Derivatives not Designated Unrealized Gain (Loss) Recognized in Income
as Hedging Instruments   Amount
Derivative Category Statements of Income Location 2009  2008  2007 
   (in millions)
Energy-related derivatives: Wholesale revenues $5.3  $(1.9) $ 
  Fuel  (6.0)  5.1    
  Purchased power  (4.5)  (2.3)   
  Other income (expense), net        2.8 
 
Total   $(5.2) $0.9  $2.8 
 
Contingent Features
The Company does not have any credit arrangements that would require material changes in payment schedules or terminations as a result of a credit rating downgrade. There are certain derivatives that could require collateral, but not accelerated payment, in the event of various credit rating changes of certain affiliated companies. At December 31, 2009, the fair value of derivative liabilities with contingent features was $1.7 million.
At December 31, 2009, the Company had no collateral posted with their derivative counterparties; however, because of the joint and several liability features underlying these derivatives, the maximum potential collateral requirements arising from the credit-risk-related contingent features, at a rating below BBB- and/or Baa3, is $33.3 million.
Currently, the Company has investment grade credit ratings from the major rating agencies with respect to debt.
Generally, collateral may be provided by a Southern Company guaranty, letter of credit, or cash. Included in these amounts are certain agreements that could require collateral in the event that one or more power pool participants has a credit rating change to below investment grade.

II-428


NOTES (continued)
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 2009 Annual Report
10. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL INFORMATION (UNAUDITED)
Summarized quarterly financial information for 20082009 and 20072008 is as follows:
                        
 Operating Operating Net Operating Operating Net
Quarter Ended Revenues Income Income Revenues Income Income
  (in thousands)  
March 2009
 $231,517 $66,981 $27,916 
June 2009
 230,598 73,276 31,054 
September 2009
 283,369 127,165 67,280 
December 2009
 201,168 46,134 29,602 
 (in thousands)
March 2008
 $215,532 $52,661 $28,975  $215,532 $52,661 $28,975 
June 2008
 316,584 79,732 35,420  316,584 79,732 35,420 
September 2008
 515,871 118,592 59,562  515,871 118,592 59,562 
December 2008
 265,554 61,884 20,402  265,554 61,884 20,402 
 
March 2007 $192,492 $74,517 $32,036 
June 2007 244,018 84,840 39,854 
September 2007 347,751 107,208 51,438 
December 2007 187,753 24,510 8,309 
The Company’s business is influenced by seasonal weather conditions. Fourth quarter 2007 operating income and2009 net income were impacted by the lossincludes profit recognized on the gasifier portionOUC construction contract of the IGCC project of $17.6$10.6 million pretax and $10.7$6.5 million after tax.

II-405II-429


SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA 2004-20082005-2009
Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies 20082009 Annual Report
                                        
 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004  2009 2008 2007 2006 2005
Operating Revenues (in thousands):
                     
Wholesale — non-affiliates $667,979 $416,648 $279,384 $223,058 $266,463  $394,366  $667,979  $416,648  $279,384  $223,058 
Wholesale — affiliates 638,266 547,229 491,762 556,664 425,065   544,415   638,266   547,229   491,762   556,664 
Total revenues from sales of electricity 1,306,245 963,877 771,146 779,722 691,528   938,781   1,306,245   963,877   771,146   779,722 
Other revenues 7,296 8,137 5,902 1,282 9,783   7,870   7,296   8,137   5,902   1,282 
Total $1,313,541 $972,014 $777,048 $781,004 $701,311  $946,651  $1,313,541  $972,014  $777,048  $781,004 
Net Income (in thousands)
 $144,359 $131,637 $124,469 $114,791 $111,508  $155,852  $144,359  $131,637  $124,469  $114,791 
Cash Dividends on Common Stock (in thousands)
 $94,500 $89,800 $77,700 $72,400 $207,000  $106,100  $94,500  $89,800  $77,700  $72,400 
Return on Average Common Equity (percent)
 13.03 12.52 13.16 13.68 12.23   13.36   13.03   12.52   13.16   13.68 
Total Assets (in thousands)
 $2,813,140 $2,768,774 $2,690,943 $2,302,976 $2,067,013  $3,043,053  $2,813,140  $2,768,774  $2,690,943  $2,302,976 
Gross Property Additions/Plant Acquisitions (in thousands)
 $49,964 $139,198 $465,026 $241,103 $115,606  $331,289  $49,964  $139,198  $465,026  $241,103 
Capitalization (in thousands):
                     
Common stock equity $1,138,361 $1,077,887 $1,025,504 $866,343 $811,611  $1,195,122  $1,138,361  $1,077,887  $1,025,504  $866,343 
Long-term debt 1,297,353 1,297,099 1,296,845 1,099,520 1,099,435   1,297,607   1,297,353   1,297,099   1,296,845   1,099,520 
Total (excluding amounts due within one year) $2,435,714 $2,374,986 $2,322,349 $1,965,863 $1,911,046  $2,492,729  $2,435,714  $2,374,986  $2,322,349  $1,965,863 
Capitalization Ratios (percent):
                     
Common stock equity 46.7 45.4 44.2 44.1 42.5   47.9   46.7   45.4   44.2   44.1 
Long-term debt 53.3 54.6 55.8 55.9 57.5   52.1   53.3   54.6   55.8   55.9 
Total (excluding amounts due within one year) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0   100.0   100.0   100.0   100.0   100.0 
Security Ratings:
                     
Unsecured Long-Term Debt —                     
Moody’s Baa1 Baa1 Baa1 Baa1 Baa1 Baa1 Baa1 Baa1 Baa1 Baa1
Standard and Poor’s BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+
Fitch BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+ BBB+
Kilowatt-Hour Sales (in thousands):
                     
Sales for resale — non-affiliates 7,573,713 6,985,592 5,093,527 3,932,638 5,369,261 
Sales for resale — affiliates 9,402,020 10,766,003 8,493,441 6,355,249 6,583,017 
Wholesale — non-affiliates  7,513,569   7,573,713   6,985,592   5,093,527   3,932,638 
Wholesale — affiliates  12,293,585   9,402,020   10,766,003   8,493,441   6,355,249 
Total 16,975,733 17,751,595 13,586,968 10,287,887 11,952,278   19,807,154   16,975,733   17,751,595   13,586,968   10,287,887 
Average Revenue Per Kilowatt-Hour (cents)
 7.69 5.43 5.68 7.58 5.79   4.74   7.69   5.43   5.68   7.58 
Plant Nameplate Capacity Ratings (year-end) (megawatts)
 7,555 6,896 6,733 5,403 4,775   7,880   7,555   6,896   6,733   5,403 
Maximum Peak-Hour Demand (megawatts):
                     
Winter 3,042 2,815 2,780 2,037 2,098   3,224   3,042   2,815   2,780   2,037 
Summer 3,538 3,717 2,869 2,420 2,740   3,308   3,538   3,717   2,869   2,420 
Annual Load Factor (percent)
 50.0 48.2 53.6 48.9 54.4   52.6   50.0   48.2   53.6   48.9 
Plant Availability (percent)
 96.0 96.7 98.3 97.6 97.9   96.7   96.0   96.7   98.3   97.6 
Source of Energy Supply (percent):
                     
Gas 75.6 70.4 68.3 72.6 61.9   84.4   75.6   70.4   68.3   72.6 
Purchased power —                     
From non-affiliates 11.3 8.8 9.6 9.6 24.7   7.9   11.3   8.8   9.6   9.6 
From affiliates 13.1 20.8 22.1 17.8 13.4   7.7   13.1   20.8   22.1   17.8 
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0   100.0   100.0   100.0   100.0   100.0 
           
II-430

II-406


PART III
Items 10, 11, 12 (except for “Equity Compensation Plan Information” which is included herein on page III-42)III-41), 13, and 14 for Southern Company are incorporated by reference to Southern Company’s Definitive Proxy Statement relating to the 20092010 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. Specifically, reference is made to “Nominees for Election as Directors,” “Corporate Governance,” and “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance” for Item 10, “Executive Compensation,” “Compensation Discussion and Analysis,” “Compensation and Management Succession Committee Report,” “Director Compensation,” and “Director Compensation Table” for Item 11, “Stock Ownership Table” for Item 12, “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions” and “Director Independence” for Item 13, and “Principal Public Accounting Firm Fees” for Item 14.
Items 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 for Alabama Power, Georgia Power, and Mississippi Power are incorporated by reference to the Definitive Information Statements of Alabama Power, Georgia Power, and Mississippi Power relating to each of their respective 20092010 Annual Meetings of Shareholders. Specifically, reference is made to “Nominees for Election as Directors,” “Corporate Governance,” and “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance” for Item 10, “Executive Compensation Information,” “Compensation Discussion and Analysis,” “Compensation and Management Succession Committee Report,” “Director Compensation,” and “Director Compensation Table” for Item 11, “Stock Ownership Table” for Item 12, “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions” and “Director Independence” for Item 13, and “Principal Public Accounting Firm Fees” for Item 14.
Items 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 for Gulf Power are contained herein.
Items 10, 11, 12 and 13 for Southern Power are omitted pursuant to General Instruction I(2)(c) of Form 10-K. Item 14 for Southern Power is contained herein.
ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
Identification of directors of Gulf Power.
   
Susan N. Story
 Fred C. Donovan, Sr.(1)
President and Chief Executive Officer Age 6869
Age 4849 Served as Director since 1991
Served as Director since 2003  
   
C. LeDon Anchors(1)
 William A. Pullum(1)
Age 6869 Age 6162
Served as Director since 2001 Served as Director since 2001
   
William C. Cramer, Jr.(1)
 Winston E. Scott(1)
Age 5657 Age 5859
Served as Director since 2002 Served as Director since 2003
 
(1) No position other than director.
Each of the above is currently a director of Gulf Power, serving a term running from the last annual meeting of Gulf Power’s shareholders (June 24, 2008)30, 2009) for one year until the next annual meeting or until a successor is elected and qualified.
There are no arrangements or understandings between any of the individuals listed above and any other person pursuant to which he or she was or is to be selected as a director, other than any arrangements or understandings with directors or officers of Gulf Power acting solely in their capacities as such.

III-1


Identification of executive officers of Gulf Power.
   
Susan N. Story
 Theodore J. McCullough
President and Chief Executive Officer Vice President — Senior Production Officer
Age 4849 Age 4546
Served as Executive Officer since 2003 Served as Executive Officer since 2007
   
P. Bernard Jacob
 Bentina C. Terry
Vice President — Customer Operations Vice President — External Affairs and Corporate Services
Age 5455 Age 3839
Served as Executive Officer since 2003 Served as Executive Officer since 2007
   
Philip C. Raymond
  
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer  
Age 4950  
Served as Executive Officer since 2008  
Each of the above is currently an executive officer of Gulf Power, serving a term running from the last annual organizational meeting of the directors (July 24, 2008)23, 2009) for one year until the next annual organizational meeting or until a successor is elected and qualified.
There are no arrangements or understandings between any of the individuals listed above and any other person pursuant to which he or she was or is to be selected as an officer, other than any arrangements or understandings with directors or officers of Gulf Power acting solely in their capacities as such.
Identification of certain significant employees.None.
Family relationships.None.
Business experience.Unless noted otherwise, each director has served in his or her present position for at least the past five years.
DIRECTORS
Gulf Power’s Board of Directors possesses collective knowledge and experience in accounting, finance, leadership, business operations, risk management, corporate governance, and Gulf Power’s industry.
Susan N. Story- President and Chief Executive Officer.Officer of Gulf Power. Ms. Story has previously served in leadership roles in a number of areas, including engineering and construction, supply chain, real estate and corporate services with affiliated subsidiaries. Currently, Ms. Story also serves on the Board of Directors of Raymond James Financial, Inc.
C. LeDon Anchors- Attorney and President of Anchors Smith Grimsley, Attorneys at Law, Fort Walton Beach, Florida. As an attorney, Mr. Anchors areas of practice include real estate, family law, banking, business law, commercial law, corporate law, government, and probate. He is also a director of Beach Community Bank.Bank, Fort Walton Beach, Florida, where he serves on the audit committee and the assets and liabilities committee. Mr. Anchors has also served in leadership roles at a number of civic organizations.
William C. Cramer, Jr.- President and ownerOwner of Tommy Thomasautomobile dealerships in Florida, Georgia, and Alabama. Mr. Cramer has been an authorized Chevrolet Panama City, Florida.dealer since 1978. In 2009, Mr Cramer became an authorized dealer of Cadillac, Buick, and GMC vehicles.
Fred C. Donovan, Sr.- Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Baskerville-Donovan, Inc. (an architectural and engineering firm), Pensacola, Florida. Mr. Donovan is responsible for establishing the strategic direction and providing the overall management of the firm. He also serves as Chairman of the Baptist Healthcare Board of Directors. Previously, he has served in leadership roles with Chambers of Commerce in his area.

III-2


William A. Pullum- President/President and Director of Bill Pullum Realty, Inc., Navarre, Florida. Mr. Pullum is also a real estate developer.
Winston E. Scott- Dean, College of Aeronautics, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, Florida since August 2008. He previously served as Vice President and Deputy General Manager, Engineering and Science Contract Group at Jacobs Engineering, Houston, Texas, from 2006 to 2008 and Executive Director of the Florida Space Authority, Cape Canaveral, Florida, from 2003 to 2006. Mr. Scott’s experience also included serving as a pilot in the U.S. Navy and an astronaut with the National Aeronautic and Space Administration.
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
P. Bernard Jacob- Vice President of Customer Operations since 2007. He previously served as Vice President of External Affairs and Corporate Services from 2003 to 2007.
Philip C. Raymond- Vice President and Chief Financial Officer since April 2008. He previously served as Vice President and Comptroller of Alabama Power from January 2005 to April 2008 and Eastern Region Internal Auditing Director of SCS from September 2003 through January 2005.

III-2


Theodore J. McCullough- Vice President and Senior Production Officer since 2007. He previously served as the Manager of Georgia Power’s Plant Branch from December 2003 to August 2007.
Bentina C. Terry- Vice President of External Affairs and Corporate Services since 2007. She previously served as General Counsel and Vice President of External Affairs for Southern Nuclear from January 2005 to March 2007 and Area Distribution Manager of Georgia Power from February 2004 through January 2005.
Involvement in certain legal proceedings.None.
Promoters and Certain Control Persons.None.
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance.None.
Code of Ethics
The registrants collectively have adopted a code of business conduct and ethics that applies to each director, officer, and employee of the registrants and their subsidiaries. The code of business conduct and ethics can be found on Southern Company’s website located at www.southerncompany.com. The code of business conduct and ethics is also available free of charge in print to any shareholder by requesting a copy from Melissa K. Caen, Assistant Corporate Secretary, Southern Company, 30 Ivan Allen Jr. Boulevard NW, Atlanta, Georgia 30308. Any amendment to or waiver from the code of ethics that applies to executive officers and directors will be posted on the website.
Corporate Governance
Southern Company has adopted corporate governance guidelines and committee charters. The corporate governance guidelines and the charters of Southern Company’s Audit Committee, Compensation and Management Succession Committee, Finance Committee, Governance Committee, and Nuclear/Operations Committee can be found on Southern Company’s website located at www.southerncompany.com. The corporate governance guidelines and charters are also available free of charge in print to any shareholder by requesting a copy from Melissa K. Caen, Assistant Corporate Secretary, Southern Company, 30 Ivan Allen Jr. Boulevard NW, Atlanta, Georgia 30308.

III-3


ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
In this Compensation Discussion and Analysis (CD&A) and this Form 10-K, references to the “Compensation Committee” are to the Compensation and Management Succession Committee of the Board of Directors of Southern Company.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND POLICIES
Southern Company, through a single executive compensation program for all officers of its subsidiaries, drives and rewards both Southern Company financial performance and individual business unit performance.
This executive compensation program is based on a philosophy that total executive compensation must be competitive with the companies in our industry, must be tied to and motivate our executives to meet our short- and long-term performance goals, and must foster and encourage alignment of executive interests with the interests of our stockholders and our customers.customers, and must not encourage excessive risk-taking. The program generally is designed to motivate all employees, including executives, to achieve operational excellence and financial goals while maintaining a safe work environment.
The executive compensation program places significant focus on rewarding performance. The program is performance-based in several respects:
 Southern Company’s actual earnings per share (EPS) and Gulf Power’s business unit performance, which includes return on equity (ROE), compared to target performance levels established early in the year, determine actual payouts under the ultimate annual incentive payouts.short-term (annual) performance-based compensation program (Performance Pay Program).
 
 Southern Company common stock (Common Stock) price changes result in higher or lower ultimate values of stock options.
 
 Southern Company’s dividend payout and total shareholder return compared to those of its industry peers lead to higher or lower payouts under the Performance Dividend Program (performance dividends).
In support of the performance-based pay philosophy, we have no general employment contracts with our named executive officers or guaranteed severance, except upon a change-in-control,change in control, and no pay is conditioned solely upon continued employment withof any of the named executive officers, other than base salary.
The pay-for-performance principles apply not only to the named executive officers, but to hundreds of Gulf Power employees. The annual incentive programPerformance Pay Program covers almost all of the approximately 1,300 Gulf Power employees and our change-in-control protection program covers all Gulf Power employees not part of a collective bargaining unit.employees. Stock options and performance dividends cover approximately 250 Gulf Power employees. These programs engage our people in our business, which ultimately is good not only for them, but for Gulf Power’s customers and Southern Company’s stockholders.
OVERVIEW OF EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION COMPONENTS
The executive compensation program is composed of several components, each of which plays a different role. The tablechart below discusses the intended role of each material pay component, what it rewards, and why we use it. Following the tablechart is additional information that describes how we made 20082009 pay decisions.

III-4


     
  Intended Role and What the Element  
Pay Element Rewards Why We Use the Element
Base Salary
 Base salary is pay for competence in the executive role, with a focus on scope of responsibilities. Market practice.

Provides a threshold level of cash compensation for job performance.
     
 
Annual IncentivePerformance-Based Compensation: Performance Pay Program
 Gulf Power’s annual incentive programThe Performance Pay Program rewards achievement of operational, EPS, and business unit financial goals. Market practice.

Focuses attention on achievement of short-term goals that ultimately work to fulfill our mission to customers and lead to increased stockholder value in the long-term.long term.
     
 
Long-Term Incentive:Performance-Based Compensation: Stock Options
 Stock options reward price increases in Common Stock over the market price on the date of grant, over a 10-year term. Market practice.

Performance-based compensation.

Aligns executives’ interests with those of Southern Company’s stockholders.
     
 Market practice.
Long-Term Incentive:Performance-Based Compensation: Performance Dividends
 Performance dividends provide cash compensation dependent on the number of stock options held at year end, Southern Company’s declared dividends on the Common Stock paid during the year, and Southern Company’s four-year total shareholder return versus industry peers. Market practice.

Performance-based compensation.

Enhances the value of stock options and focuses executives on maintaining a significant dividend yield for Southern Company’s stockholders.

Aligns executives’ interests with Southern Company’s stockholders’ interests since payouts are dependent on performance, defined as Common Stock performance vs.the returns realized by Southern Company’s stockholders versus those of our industry peers.

Market practice.
     
 
Southern Excellence AwardsRetirement Benefits
 An employee may receive discretionary cashThe Southern Company Deferred Compensation Plan provides the opportunity to defer to future years all or non-cash awards based on extraordinary performance.

Awards are not tied to pre-established goals.
Provides a means of rewarding, on a current basis, extraordinary performance.
Relocation Incentive
Lump sum payment of 10%part of base salary provides incentiveand performance-based compensation, except stock options, in either a prime interest rate or Common Stock account.

Executives participate in employee benefit plans available to geographically relocate.all employees of Gulf Power, including a 401(k) savings plan and the funded Southern Company Pension Plan (Pension Plan).
 EnhancesMarket practice.

Permitting compensation deferral is a cost-effective method of providing additional cash flow to Gulf Power while enhancing the valueretirement savings of executives.

The purpose of these supplemental plans is to eliminate the relocation program perquisite.
effect of tax limitations on the payment of retirement benefits.

III-5


     
  Intended Role and What the Element  
Pay Element Rewards Why We Use the Element
Retirement Benefits
 The Southern Company Deferred Compensation Plan (Deferred Compensation Plan) provides the opportunity to defer to future years all or part of base salary and annual incentive in either a prime interest rate account or Common Stock account.

Executives participate in employee benefit plans available to all employees of Gulf Power, including a 401(k) savings plan and the funded Southern Company Pension Plan (Pension Plan).

The Supplemental Benefit Plan counts pay, including deferred salary, ineligible to be counted under the Pension Plan and the 401(k) plan due to Internal Revenue Service rules.

The Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan counts short-term incentiveannual performance-based pay above 15% of base salary for pension purposes.
 Permitting compensation deferral is a cost-effective method of providing additional cash flow to Gulf Power while enhancing the retirement savings of executives.

The purpose of these supplemental plans is to eliminate the effect of tax limitations on the payment of retirement benefits.

Represents an important component of competitive market-based compensation in Southern Company’s peer group and generally.
     
 
Perquisites and Other Personal Benefits
 Personal financial planning maximizes the perceived value of our executive compensation program to executives and allows executivesthem to focus on Gulf Power’s operations.

Home security systems lower the risk of harm to executives.

Club memberships are provided primarily for business use.

Relocation benefits cover the costs associated with geographic relocationrelocations at the request of the employer.

Limited personal use of corporate-owned aircraft associated with business travel.
 Perquisites benefit both Gulf Power and executives, at low cost to Gulf Power.
     
 
Post-Termination Pay
 Change-in-control plans provide severance pay, accelerated vesting, and payment of short- and long-term incentive awardsperformance-based compensation upon a change-in-controlchange in control of Gulf Power or Southern Company coupled with involuntary termination not for “Cause” or a voluntary termination for “Good Reason.” Market practice.

Providing protections to senior executives upon a change-in-controlchange in control minimizes disruption during a pending or anticipated change-in-control.change in control.

Payment and vesting occur only inupon the eventoccurrence of both an actual change-in-controlchange in control and loss of the executive’s position.
 

III-6


MARKET DATA
For the named executive officers, we reviewthe Compensation Committee reviews compensation data from large, publicly-owned electric and gas utilities. The data was developed and analyzed by Towers Perrin, the compensation consultant retained by the Compensation Committee. The companies included each year in the primary peer group are those whose data is available through the consultant’s database. Those companies are drawn from this list of primarily regulated utilities of $2 billion in revenues and up. Proxy data for the entire list of companies below also is used. No other companies’ data are used in our market-pay benchmarking.

III-6


     
 
     
AGL Resources Inc. El Paso CorporationPG&E Corporation
Allegheny Energy, EastInc.Entergy Corporation Pinnacle West Capital Corporation
AlleghenyAlliant Energy Corporation Entergy CorporationEPCO PPL Corporation
Alliant EnergyAmeren Corporation Exelon Corporation Progress Energy, Inc.
Ameren CorporationAmerican Electric Power Company, Inc. FirstEnegyFirstEnergy Corp. Public Service Enterprise Group Inc.
American Electric Power Company, Inc.Atmos Energy Corporation FPL Group, Inc. Puget Energy, Inc.
Atmos EnergyCalpine Corporation Integrys Energy Company, Inc. Reliant Energy, Inc.
Calpine CorporationCenterPoint Energy, Inc MDU Resources, Inc. Salt River Project
CenterPointCMS Energy IncCorporation Mirant Corporation SCANA Corporation
CMS Energy CorporationConsolidated Edison, Inc. New York Power Authority Sempra Energy
Consolidated Edison,Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Nicor, Inc. Sierra Pacific ResourcesSouthern Union Company
ConstellationCPS Energy Group, Inc. Northeast Utilities Southern Union CompanySpectra Energy
DCP MidstreamNRG Energy, Inc.TECO Energy
Dominion Resources Inc. NRG Energy, Inc.NSTAR Tennessee Valley Authority
Duke Energy Corporation NSTARNV Energy, Inc. The Williams Companies, Inc.
Dynegy Inc. OGE Energy Corp. Wisconsin Energy Corporation
Edison International Pepco Holdings, Inc. Xcel Energy Inc.
     
 
Southern Company is one of the largest U.S. utility companies inbased on revenues and market capitalization, and its largest business units are some of the largest in the industry as well. For that reason, the consultant size-adjusts the survey market data in order to fit it to the scope of our business.
In using this market data, market is defined as the size-adjusted 50th percentile of the data, with a focus on pay opportunities at target performance (rather than actual plan payouts). Gulf Power specifically looks at the marketMarket data for chief executive officer positions and other positions in terms of scope of responsibilities that most closely resemble the positions held by the named executive officers.officers are reviewed. Based on that data, Gulf Power establishes a total target compensation opportunity is established for each named executive officer. Total target compensation opportunity is the sum of base salary, annual incentiveperformance-based compensation at the target performance level, and stock option awards with associated performance dividends at a target value. Actual compensation paid may be more or less than the total target compensation opportunity based on actual performance above or below target performance levels. As a result, the compensation program is designed to result in payouts that are market-appropriate given Gulf Power’s and Southern Company’s performance for the year or period.
We did not target a specified weight for base salary or annual or long-term incentivesperformance-based compensation as a percentage of total target compensation opportunities, nor did amounts realized or realizable from prior compensation serve to increase or decrease 20082009 compensation amounts. Total target compensation opportunities for senior management as a group are managed to be at the median of the market for companies of our size and in our industry. The total target compensation opportunity established in 20082009 for each named executive officer is shown below.

III-7


                                
 Total Target Annual Long-Term Total Target
 Long-Term Compensation Performance-Based Performance-Based Compensation
Name Salary Annual Incentive Incentive Opportunity Salary Compensation Compensation Opportunity
S. N. Story $396,084 $237,650 $348,550 $982,284  $396,084 $237,650 $495,105 $1,128,839 
R. R. Labrato $262,500 $118,126 $129,933 $510,559 
P. C. Raymond $228,433 $99,825 $72,109 $400,367  $228,433 $102,795 $137,055 $468,283 
P. B. Jacob $230,346 $103,656 $110,694 $444,696  $230,346 $103,656 $138,206 $472,208 
T. J. McCullough $182,973 $73,189 $70,439 $326,601  $182,973 $73,189 $73,186 $329,348 
B. C. Terry $228,433 $102,795 $103,732 $434,960  $228,433 $102,795 $137,055 $468,283 
As is our long-standing practice, the salary levels shown above were not effective before March 2008. For Mr. Raymond, the salary level shown was not effective until April 2008 when he assumed his new position. Therefore, the amounts reported in the Summary Compensation Table are lower because that table reports actual amounts paid in 2008. For purposes of comparing the value of our compensation program to the market data, stock options wereare valued at 12%5.7%, and performance dividend targetstarget at 10%, of the average daily Common Stock price for the year preceding the

III-7


grant, both of which representedrepresent risk-adjusted present values on the date of grant and wereare consistent with the methodologies used to develop the market data. For the 20082009 grant of stock options and the performance dividend targetstarget established for the 2008 — 2011 performance2009-2012 performance-measurement period, this value was $8.03$4.94 per stock option granted. In the long-term incentive column, approximately 55%36% of the value shown is attributable to stock options and approximately 45%64% is attributable to performance dividends. The stock option value used for market data comparisons exceeds the value reported in the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table because the value above is calculated assuming that the options are held for their full 10-year terms. The calculation of the Black-Scholes value reported in the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table uses historical holding period averages of approximately five years. The value of stock options, with the associated performance dividends, declined from 2007.2008. In 2007,2008 and 2009, the value of the dividend equivalents was 10% of the value of the average daily Common Stock price foron the year preceding thestock option grant as in 2009,date, but the value of the stock options was 15% rather thanoption declined from 12% to 5.7%. In 2007,2008, the performance dividends represented 40%45% of the long-term incentivetarget value and stock options represented 60%55% of that value. More information on how stock options are valued is reported in the Grants of Plan-Based Award table and the information accompanying it.
As discussed above, the Compensation Committee targets total target compensation opportunities for senior executives as a group at market. Therefore, some executives may be paid somewhat above and others somewhat below market. This practice allows for minor differentiation based on time in the position, scope of responsibilities, and individual performance. The differences in the total pay opportunities for each named executive officer are based almost exclusively on the differences indicated by the market data for persons holding similar positions. Mr. Raymond’sThe average total target compensation opportunity was lower than it would have been had he been in his current positionopportunities for the entire year.named executive officers for 2009 were at the median of the market data described above. Because of the use of market data from a large number of peer companies for positions that are not identical in terms of scope of responsibility from company to company, we do not consider the total target opportunity to be at market if it is within a range of 90% to 110% of the median of the market data. The average total target compensation opportunities for the named executive officers for 2008 were within this rangeslight differences material and therefore we continue to believe that our compensation program is market-appropriate. Generally, we consider compensation to be within an appropriate range if it is not more or less than 10% of the applicable market data.
In 2008, the Compensation Committee received a detailed comparison of our executive benefits program to the benefits of a group of other large utilities and general industry companies. The results indicated that our overall executive benefits program was at market. Because this data does not change significantly year over year, this study is only updated every few years.
DESCRIPTION OF KEY COMPENSATION COMPONENTS
20082009 Base Salary
The named executive officers are each within a position level with a base salary range that is established under the direction of the Compensation Committee using the market data described above. Also considered in recommendingConsistent with the specificbroad-based compensation program for 2009, there were no base salary leveladjustments for each named executive officer is the need to retain an experienced team, internal equity, time in position, and individual performance. This analysis of individual performance

III-8


included the degree of competence and initiative exhibited and the individual’s relative contribution to the results of operations in prior years.
Base salaries for Ms. Terry and Messrs. Jacob and Raymond were recommended by Ms. Story, the Gulf Power President and Chief Executive Officer, to Mr. David M. Ratcliffe, the Southern Company President and Chief Executive Officer. Mr. McCullough currently serves as an executive officer of Gulf Power and of Southern Company’s generation business unit (Southern Company Generation). His base salary was recommended by an Executive Vice President of Southern Company Generation, with input from Ms. Story, to Mr. Thomas A. Fanning, the Southern Company Chief Operating Officer. Ms. Story’s base salary was approved by Mr. Ratcliffe. Mr. Labrato’s base salary also was approved by Mr. Ratcliffe following his transfer to SCS to lead Southern Company’s Internal Audit function which reports to Mr. Ratcliffe.
The actual base salary levels set for each of the named executive officers were set withinofficers.
2009 Performance-Based Compensation
This section describes our performance-based compensation program in 2009. The Compensation Committee approved changes to that program in 2009, to be effective in 2010. These changes are described in the pre-established salary ranges.
2008 Incentivelast section of this CD&A entitled 2010 Executive Compensation Program Changes.
Achieving Operational and Financial Goals — Our Guiding Principle for IncentivePerformance-Based Compensation
Our number one priority is to provide our customers outstanding reliability and superior service at low prices while achieving a level of financial performance that benefits Southern Company’s stockholders in the short and long term.
In 2008,2009, we strove for and rewarded:
  Continued industry-leading reliability and customer satisfaction, while maintaining our low retail prices relative to the national average; and
 
  Meeting energy demand with the best economic and environmental choices.

III-8


In 2008,2009, we also focused on and rewarded:
  Southern Company EPS Growth;growth;
 
  Gulf Power ROE in the top quartile of comparable electric utilities;

III-9


  Common Stock dividend growth;
 
  Long-term, risk-adjusted Southern Company total shareholder return; and
 
  Financial Integrity — an attractive risk-adjusted return, sound financial policy, and a stable “A” credit rating.
The incentiveperformance-based compensation program is designed to encourage Gulf Power to achieve these goals.
The Southern Company Chief Executive Officer, with the assistance of Southern Company’s Human Resources staff, recommends to the Compensation Committee program design and award amounts for senior executives.executives, including the named executive officers.
20082009 Annual IncentivePerformance Pay Program
Program Design
The Performance Pay Program is Southern Company’s annual incentive plan.performance-based compensation program. Almost all employees of Gulf Power are participants, including the named executive officers, for a total of over 1,300 Gulf Power participants.
The performance measured by the program uses goals set at the beginning of each year by the Compensation Committee.
An illustration of the annual incentivePerformance Pay Program goal structure for 20082009 is provided below.
  Operational goals for 20082009 were safety, customer service,satisfaction, plant availability, transmission and distribution system reliability, inclusion, and for Southern Company Generation, net income.operations and maintenance cost performance. Each of these operational goals is explained in more detail under “Goal Details”Goal Details below. The result of all operational goals is averaged and multiplied by the bonus impact of the EPS and business unit financial goals. The amount for each goal can range from 0.90 to 1.10 or can be 0.00 if a threshold performance level is not achieved as more fully described below. The level of achievement for each operational goal is determined and the results are averaged.
 
  Southern Company EPS is weighted at 50% of the financial goals. EPS is defined as earnings from continuing operations divided by average shares outstanding during the year. The EPS performance measure is applicable to all participants in the Performance Pay Program, including the named executive officers.

III-10III-9


Business unit financial performance is weighted at 50% of the financial goals. Gulf Power’s financial performance goal is ROE, which is defined as Gulf Power’s net income divided by average equity for the year. For Southern Company Generation, it is calculated using a corporate-wide weighted average of all the business unit financial performance goals, including primarily the ROE of Gulf Power and affiliated companies, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, and Mississippi Power. For Mr. McCullough, the business unit financial goal was weighted 30% Gulf Power ROE and 20% Southern Company Generation financial goal. The business unit financial goal for corporate-level employees of SCS was the Southern Company corporate-wide weighted average of all the business unit financial goals. Because Messrs. Labrato and Raymond were employed during 2008, by Gulf Power and SCS, and Alabama Power and Gulf Power, respectively, the business unit financial goals were pro-rated based upon the period of time spent with each employing company.
The Compensation Committee may make adjustments, both positive and negative, to goal achievement for purposes of determining payouts. Such adjustments include the impact of items considered one time,extraordinary or unusual in nature, infrequent in occurrence, outside of normal operations, or not anticipated in the business plan when the earnings goal was established, and of sufficient magnitude to warrant recognition. The Compensation Committee made an adjustment in 20082009 to eliminate the effect of $83a $202 million in after-tax chargescharge to Southern Company earnings taken in 2008.2009. The chargescharge related to the settlement agreement with MC Asset Recovery, LLC (MCAR) to resolve an action which arose out of the bankruptcy proceeding of Mirant Corporation, a positionformer subsidiary of Southern Company took concerning the timing of tax deductions associated with sale-in-lease-out (SILO) transactions that were challenged by the Internal Revenue Service. In making this decision, the Compensation Committee considered that the charges only affected the timing of deductions takenuntil its spin-off in April 2001. The settlement included an agreement by Southern Company related to the SILO transactions, that the future tax benefits due to the timing change likely will be minimalpay MCAR $202 million, which was paid in future years and will likely have no impact on future Performance Pay Program award sizes, and that the impact of the tax benefits in earlier years was minimal — an average of just over two percent in 2002 through 2007.mid-2009. This adjustment increased the average payout for 20082009 performance by approximately 30%.
Under the terms of the program, no payout can be made if Southern Company’s current earnings are not sufficient to fund its Common Stock dividend at the same level or higher than the prior year.
Goal Details
Operational Goals:
Customer ServiceSatisfaction — Gulf Power uses customer satisfaction surveys to evaluate its performance. The survey results provide an overall ranking for Gulf Power, as well as a ranking for each customer segment: residential, commercial, and industrial.
Reliability — Transmission and distribution system reliability performance is measured by the frequency and duration of outages. Performance targets for reliability are set internally based on historical performance, expected weather conditions, and expected capital expenditures.
Availability — Peak season equivalent forced outage rate is an indicator of availability and efficient generation fleet operations during the months when generation needs are greatest. The rate is calculated by dividing the number of hours of forced outages by total generation hours.
Safety — Southern Company’s Target Zero program is focused on continuous improvement in having a safe work environment. The performance is measured by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration recordable incident rate.
Inclusion/Diversity — The inclusion program seeks to improve our inclusive workplace. This goal includes measures for work environment (employee satisfaction survey), representation of minorities and females in leadership roles, and supplier diversity.
Southern Company capital expenditures “gate” or threshold goal — For 2009, Southern Company strived to manage total capital expenditures, excluding nuclear fuel, for the participating business units at or below $4.135$4.5 billion for 2008.and Gulf Power strived to manage such expenditures at or below $478 million. If the Southern Company or Gulf Power capital expenditure target is exceeded, total operational goal performance is capped at 0.90 for all business units, regardless of the actual operational goal results. Adjustments to the goal may occur due to significant events not anticipated in Southern Company’s and Gulf Power’s business planplans established early in 2008,2009, such as acquisitions or disposition of assets, new capital projects, and other events.

III-11


For Mr. McCullough, the operational goals were weighted 60% based on Gulf Power’s operational goals and 40% based on Southern Company Generation’s operational goals. During 2008, Mr. Labrato was employed by Gulf Power for a period of time and SCS for the remainder of the year. Mr. Raymond was employed by Alabama Power for a period of time and Gulf Power for the remainder of the year. The operational goals for Messrs. Labrato and Raymond were pro-rated based on the period of time spent with each employing company.

III-10


The range of performance levels established for theeach operational goals aregoal is detailed below.
           
      Availability  
Availability -Safety -  
      Gulf Power/ Gulf Power/  
      Southern Southern
CompanyCompany  
Level of Customer   Generation/Company Generation/  
Performance ServiceSatisfaction Reliability Alabama Power%Generation (%) Alabama PowerSafety Inclusion
Maximum (1.10) Top quartile for each
customer segment
 Improve historical
performance
 2.25/2.00/2.00 0.95/0.20/0.950.62 or top quartile Significant
improvement
           
Target (1.00) Top quartile
overall
 Maintain historical
performance
 3.00/2.75/2.75 1.25/0.50/1.250.988  Improve
           
Threshold (0.90) 32rdnd quartile Below historical
performance
 4.00/3.75/3.75 1.50/0.80/1.501.373  Below expectations
           
0 Trigger 4th quartileAt or below median Significant issues 9.00/6.00/6.00 >1.50/>0.80/>1.50Each quarter at
threshold or below
 Significant issues
EPS and Business Unit Financial Performance:
The range of EPS and business unit financial goals for 20082009 is shown below. The ROE goal varies from the allowed retail ROE range due to state regulatory accounting requirements, wholesale activities, other non-jurisdictional revenues and expenses, and other activities not subject to state regulation.
                
                     Payout Factor  
 Payout Factor Payout Below at Associated Payout Below
 at Highest Threshold for EPS, excluding Business Unit Level of Threshold for
 Business unit Level of Operational MCAR Financial Operational Operational
Level of financial Payout Operational Goal Settlement Performance Payout Goal Goal
Performance EPS performance ROE Factor Goal Achievement Achievement Impact ROE Factor Achievement Achievement
Maximum $2.45  14.25% 2.00 2.20 0.00  $2.50  13.7% 2.00 2.20 0.00 
Target $2.32  13.25% 1.00 1.10 0.00  $2.375  12.7% 1.00 1.00 0.00 
Threshold $2.24  11.00% 0.50 0.275 0.00  $2.25  11.00% 0.01 0.01 0.00 
Below threshold <$2.24  <11.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00  <$2.25  <11.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00 
20082009 Achievement
Each named executive officer had a target annual incentivePerformance Pay Program opportunity, based on his or her position, set by the Compensation Committee at the beginning of 2008.2009. Targets are set as a percentage of base salary. Ms. Story’s target was set at 60%. For Ms. Terry and Messrs. Jacob and Labrato,Raymond, it was set at 45%. For Mr. Raymond, it was initially set at 40% based on his former position level and increased to 45% in April 2008 when he assumed his current position. Forfor Mr. McCullough, it was set at 40%. Actual payouts were determined by adding the payouts derived from EPS and business unit financial performance goal achievement for 20082009 and multiplying that sum by the result of the operational goal achievement. The gate goal target was not exceeded and therefore did not affect payouts. Actual 20082009 goal achievement is shown in the following table. The EPS result shown in the table is adjusted for the after-tax chargesMCAR settlement charge taken in 20082009 as described above. Therefore, payouts were determined using EPS performance results that differed from the results reported in the financial statements of Southern Company in Item

III-12


8 herein. EPS, as determined in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principlesaccounting principles generally accepted in the United States and as reported in the financial statements ofby Southern Company, in Item 8 herein was $2.26$2.07 per share.

III-11


                             
                  Business    
                  Unit Total  
                  Financial Weighted  
  Operational     EPS Goal Business Performance Financial Total
  Goal     Performance Unit Factor Performance Payout
Business Multiplier     Factor (50% Financial (50% Factor Factor
Unit (A) EPS Weight) Performance Weight) (B) (AxB)
Gulf Power  1.02  $2.37   1.54   12.66%  0.87   1.20   1.23 
                             
Southern Company             Corporate            
Generation  1.09  $2.37   1.54  Average  1.24   1.39   1.51 
                             
Alabama Power  1.07  $2.37   1.54  13.30% ROE  1.05   1.29   1.39 
                             
              Corporate            
SCS  1.07  $2.37   1.54  Average  1.24   1.39   1.49 
                             
                  Business    
                  Unit Total  
      EPS         Financial Weighted  
  Operational Excluding EPS Goal Business Performance Financial Total
  Goal MCAR Performance Unit Factor Performance Payout
Business Multiplier Settlement Factor (50% Financial (50% Factor Factor
Unit (A) Impact Weight) Performance Weight) (B) (AxB)
Gulf Power  1.08  $2.32   0.57   12.18%  0.69   0.63   0.68 
                             
Southern Company Generation  1.08  $2.32   0.57  Corporate Average  0.90   0.73   0.79 
Note that the Total Payout Factor may vary from the Total Weighted Financial Performance Factor multiplied by the operational goal multiplierOperational Goal Multiplier due to rounding. To calculate the annual incentive payoutPerformance Pay Program amount, the target opportunity (annual incentive target times base salary) is multiplied by the Total Payout Factor.
Actual performance, exceededas adjusted, was below the target performance levels established by the Compensation Committee in early 2008;2009; therefore, the payout levels also exceededwere below the target pay opportunities that were established. More information on how target pay opportunities are established is provided under the section entitled Market Data section in this CD&A.
The table below shows the pay opportunity set in early 20082009 for the annual incentivePerformance Pay Program payout at target-level performance and the actual payout based on the actual performance, as adjusted, shown above.
        
                   Target Annual Performance Actual Annual Performance
Name Target Annual Incentive Opportunity ($) Actual Annual Incentive Payout ($) Pay Program Opportunity ($) Pay Program Payout ($)
S. N. Story 237,650 292,310  237,650 161,602 
R. R. Labrato 118,126 168,021 
P. C. Raymond 99,825 126,586  102,795 69,901 
P. B. Jacob 103,656 127,496  103,656 70,486 
T. J. McCullough 73,189 98,073  73,189 53,428 
B. C. Terry 102,795 126,438  102,795 69,901 
Stock Options
Options to purchase Common Stock are granted annually and were granted in 20082009 to the named executive officers and about 250 other employees of Gulf Power. Options have a 10-year term, vest over a three-year period, fully vest upon retirement or termination of employment following a change-in-control,change in control, and expire at the earlier of five years from the date of retirement or the end of the 10-year term.
Stock option award sizes for 2008 were calculated using guidelines set by the The Compensation Committee as a percentage of base salary as shown inchanged the table below. The number ofstock option vesting provisions associated with retirement for stock options granted isin 2009 to the guideline amount divided byexecutive officers of Southern Company’s average daily Common Stock price for the 12 months preceding the grant.Company, including Ms. Story. For these grants made in 2009, unvested options are forfeited if she retires and accepts a position with a peer company within two years of retirement. The guideline percentage was set by the Compensation Committee made this change to deliver target long-term incentive compensation assuming aprovide more retention value to the stock option value,awards, to provide an inducement to not seek a position with associated performance dividends,a peer company, and to limit the post-termination compensation of approximately 25%executive officers of the Common Stock price. Southern Company who do accept positions with a peer company. Ms. Story became retirement-eligible in early 2010.
As discusseddescribed in the Market Data section above, the Compensation Committee established a target long-term performance-based compensation value for each named executive officer. The number of stock options granted, with associated performance dividends, was determined by dividing that long-term value by the value of a stock option with associated performance dividends. The value of each stock option was derived using the Black-Scholes stock option pricing model. The assumptions used in this CD&A,calculating that amount are discussed in 2008Note 8 to the financial statements of Gulf Power in Item 8 herein. For 2009, the Black-Scholes value on the grant date was $1.80 per stock option. As described in the Market Data section above, the value of the associated performance dividends was $3.14 per stock option which was 10% of the Common Stock price on the grant date. Therefore, the target value of theeach stock options,option, with the

III-13


associated performance dividends, was only 22% of the Common Stock price. Therefore, while the guideline as a percentage of salary was not increased for 2008$4.94 per stock option awards, the target value of long-term incentive compensation was less in 2008 than in 2007. ($8.03 per share in 2008 and $8.515 per share in 2007.)
option. The calculation of the 20082009 stock option grants for the named executive officers is shown below.

III-12


                     
                  Number of Stock
                  Options Granted
                  (Guideline
                  Amount/Average
          Guideline Average Daily Daily Stock
Name Guideline % Salary Amount Stock Price Price)
S. N. Story 400% of Salary $396,084  $1,584,336  $36.50   43,406 
R. R. Labrato 225% of Salary $262,500  $590,625  $36.50   16,181 
P. C. Raymond 175% of Salary $187,297  $327,770  $36.50   8,980 
P. B. Jacob 225% of Salary $223,623  $503,152  $36.50   13,785 
T. J. McCullough 175% of Salary $182,973  $320,203  $36.50   8,772 
B. C. Terry 225% of Salary $209,557  $471,503  $36.50   12,918 
The guideline percentagecalculation of the 2009 stock option grants for the named executive officers is based on the position held on the date the grants are made. Also, grants were made based on salaries in effect on March 1, 2008.shown below.
             
  Long-Term Value Per Number of Stock
Name Value Stock Option Options Granted
S. N. Story  495,105  $4.94   100,223 
P. C. Raymond  137,055  $4.94   27,744 
P. B. Jacob  138,206  $4.94   27,977 
T. J. McCullough  73,186  $4.94   14,815 
B. C. Terry  137,055  $4.94   27,744 
More information about the stock option program is contained in the Grant of Plan Based Awards Tabletable and the information accompanying it.
Performance Dividends
All option holders, including the named executive officers, can receive performance-based dividend equivalents on stock options held at the end of the year. Performance dividends can range from 0% to 100% of the Common Stock dividend paid during the year per option held at the end of the year. Actual payout will depend on Southern Company’s total shareholder return over a four-year performance measurement period compared to a group of other electric and gas utility companies. The peer group is determined at the beginning of each four-year performance-measurement period. The peer group varies from the Market Data peer group due to the timing and criteria of the peer selection process. The peer group for performance dividends is set by the Compensation Committee at the beginning of the four-year performance-measurement period. However, despite these timing differences, there is substantial overlap in the companies included.
Total shareholder return is calculated by measuring the ending value of a hypothetical $100 invested in each company’s common stock at the beginning of each of 16 quarters. In the final year of the performance-measurement period, Southern Company’s ranking in the peer group is determined at the end of each quarter and the percentile ranking is multiplied by the actual Common Stock dividend paid in that quarter. To determine the total payout per stock option held at the end of the performance-measurement period, the four quarterly amounts earned are added together.
No performance dividends are paid if Southern Company’s earnings are not sufficient to fund a Common Stock dividend at least equal to that paid in the prior year.
20082009 Payout
The peer group used to determine the 20082009 payout for the 2005-20082006-2009 performance-measurement period was made upconsisted of utilities with revenues of $2$1.2 billion or more with regulated revenues of 70%60% or more. Those companies are listed below.

III-14


     
 
     
Allegheny Energy, Inc. ExelonEntergy Corporation Progress Energy, Inc.Pinnacle West Capital Corp.
Alliant Energy Corporation FirstEnergyExelon Corporation Public Service Enterprise GroupProgress Energy, Inc.
Ameren Corporation FPL Group, Inc. Puget Energy, Inc.SCANA Corporation
American Electric Power Company, Inc. NiSource Inc. SCANASempra Energy
CenterPoint Energy, Inc.Northeast UtilitiesWestar Energy Corporation
CMS Energy CorporationNSTARWisconsin Energy Corporation
Consolidated Edison, Inc. NSTARNV Energy, Inc. SempraXcel Energy Inc.
DTE Energy CompanyOGE Energy Corp.Sierra Pacific Resources
Energy East CorporationDPL, Inc. Pepco Holdings, Inc. Wisconsin Energy Corporation
EntergyEdison InternationalPG&E Corporation Pinnacle West Capital Corp.Xcel Energy Inc.
     
 
The scale below determined the percentage of the full year’seach quarter’s dividend paid in the last year of the performance-measurement period to be paid on each stock option held at December 31, 20082009 based on the 2005-20082006-2009 performance-measurement period. Payout for performance between points was interpolated on a straight-line basis.

III-13


     
Performance vs. Peer Group Payout (% of Each Quarterly Dividend Paid)
90th percentile or higher
  100%
50th percentile (target)
  50%
10th percentile or lower
  0%
The above payout scale, when established in early 2005, paid 25% of the dividend at the 30th percentile and zero below that. The scale was extended to the 10th percentile on a straight-line basis by the Compensation Committee in October 2005, in order to avoid the earnings volatility and employee relations issues that the payout cliff created.
Southern Company’s total shareholder return performance duringas measured at the end of each quarter of the final year of the four-year performance-measurement period ending with 20082009 was the 6183strd, 4883thrd, 9153strd, and 9138stth percentile, respectively, resulting in a total payout of 78%64% of the full year’s Common Stock dividend, or $1.30.$1.10. This figureamount was multiplied by each named executive officer’s outstanding stock options at December 31, 20082009 to calculate the payout under the program. The amount paid is included in the Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation column in the Summary Compensation Table.
20112012 Opportunity
The Compensation Committee selected two peer groupgroups for the 2008-20112009-2012 performance-measurement period (which will be used to determine the 2011 payout)2012 payout amount). The results of the two peer groups will be averaged to determine the payment level. One peer group selected is made upa published index, the Philadelphia Utility Index. The other peer group (custom peer group) is a group of utility companies with revenuesthat the Company believes are similar to the Company in terms of $1.2 billion or more withbusiness models, including a mix of regulated revenues of approximately 60% or more. Thoseand non-regulated revenues.
The companies in the Philadelphia Utility Index are listed below.
Ameren CorporationExelon Corporation
American Electric Power Company, Inc.FirstEnergy Corp.
CenterPoint Energy, Inc.FPL Group, Inc.
Consolidated Edison, Inc.Northeast Utilities
Constellation Energy Group, Inc.PG&E Corporation
Dominion Resources Inc.Progress Energy, Inc.
DTE Energy CompanyPublic Service Enterprise Group Inc.
Duke Energy CorporationThe AES Corporation
Edison InternationalXcel Energy Inc.
Entergy Corporation
The guideline used to establish the peer group for the 2005-2008 performance-measurement period was somewhat different from that used in 2008 to establish the peer group for the 2008-2011 performance-measurement period. The guideline for inclusion in the peer group is reevaluated annually as needed to assist in identifying an appropriate number of companies similar to Southern Company. While the guideline does vary somewhat, 20 of the 24 companies in the custom peer group for the 2005-2008 performance-measurement period also are in the peer group established for the 2008-2011 performance-measurement period.listed below.

III-15


     
 
     
Allegheny Energy, Inc.Edison InternationalProgress Energy, Inc.
Alliant Energy Corporation
Ameren Corporation
Energy East Corporation
Entergy Corporation
Public Service Enterprise Group Inc.
Puget Energy, Inc.
American Electric Power Company, Inc. ExelonPG&E Corporation SCANA Corporation
Aquila, Inc.FPL Group, Inc.Sierra Pacific Resources
Avista CorporationHawaiian Electric Industries, Inc.TECO Energy, Inc.
CMS Energy CorporationNiSource Inc.UIL Holdings Corporation
Consolidated Edison, Inc. Northeast UtilitiesUnisourceProgress Energy, Corporation
Dominion Resources Inc. NSTARVectren Corporation
DPL Inc.Pepco Holdings, Inc.Westar Energy, Inc.
DTE Energy CompanyPG&E CorporationWisconsin Energy Corporation
Duke Energy Corporation Pinnacle West Capital Corp.Wisconsin Energy Corporation
Northeast Utilities Xcel Energy Inc.
NSTAR
     
 

III-14


The scale below will determine the percentage of each quarter’s dividend paid in the last year of the performance-measurement period to be paid on each option held at December 31, 2011,2012, based on the 2008-20112009-2012 performance-measurement period. Payout for performance between points iswill be interpolated on a straight-line basis.
     
Performance vs. Peer GroupGroups Payout (% of Each Quarterly Dividend Paid)
90th percentile or higher
  100%
50th percentile (target)
  50%
10th percentile or lower
  0%
See the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Tabletable and the information accompanying itinformation for more information about threshold, target, and maximum payout opportunities for the 2008-20112009-2012 Performance Dividend Program.
Southern Excellence Awards
The President and CEO of Gulf Power approved discretionary cash awards to Ms. Terry and Mr. Raymond for their leadership of a special project during 2008.
Timing of IncentivePerformance-Based Compensation
As discussed above, Southern Company EPS and Gulf Power’s financial performance goal for the 2008 annual incentive program2009 Performance Pay Program were established at the February 20082009 Compensation Committee meeting. Annual stock option grants also were made at that meeting. The establishment of incentiveperformance-based compensation goals and the granting of stock options were not timed with the release of material, non-public material information. This procedure was consistent with prior practices. Stock option grants are made to new hires or newly-eligible participants on preset, regular quarterly dates that were approved by the Compensation Committee. The exercise price of options granted to employees in 20082009 was the closing price of the Common Stock on the grant date of grant.or the last trading day before the grant date if the grant date was not a trading day.

III-16


Post-Employment Compensation
As mentioned above, we provide certain post-employment compensation to employees, including the named executive officers:
Retirement Benefits
Generally, all full-time employees of Gulf Power, including the named executive officers, participate in our funded Pension Plan after completing one year of service. Normal retirement benefits become payable when participants both attain age 65 and complete five years of participation. We also provide unfunded benefits that count salary and annual incentive payPerformance Pay Program payouts that isare ineligible to be counted under the Pension Plan. (These plans are the Supplemental Benefit Plan and the Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan that are mentioneddescribed in the chart on page III-29pages III-5 and III-6 of this CD&A.) See the Pension Benefits Tabletable and the information accompanying it for more information about pension-related benefits.
Gulf Power also provides the Deferred Compensation Plan which is an unfunded plan that permits participants to defer income as well as certain federal, state, and local taxes until a specified date or their retirement, disability, death, or other separation from service. Up to 50% of base salary and up to 100% of the annual incentive and performance dividendsperformance-based compensation, except stock options, may be deferred at the election of eligible employees. All of the named executive officers are eligible to participate in the Deferred Compensation Plan. See the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Tabletable and the information accompanying it for more information about the Deferred Compensation Plan.
Change-in-Control Protections
The Compensation Committee initially approved the change-in-control protection program in 1998. The program providesprovided some level of severance benefits to all employees who are not part of a collective bargaining unit, if the conditions of the program arewere met, as described below. The Compensation Committee established this program and the levels of severance amount in order to provide certain compensatory protections to executives upon a change-in-controlchange in control and thereby allow them to negotiate aggressively with a prospective purchaser. Providing such protections to our employees in general minimizeswould minimize disruption during a pending or anticipated change-in-control.change in control. For all

III-15


participants, payment and vesting would occur only upon the occurrence of both an actual change-in-controlchange in control and loss of the individual’s position. In 2009, the Compensation Committee directed Towers Perrin to review best practices for change-in-control programs and directed management to recommend any necessary changes to the program to meet those best practices. The review of the program was completed in 2009 and changes were made effective in late 2009.
Change-in-control protections, including severance pay and, in some situations, vesting or payment of long-term incentiveperformance-based awards, are provided upon a change-in-controlchange in control of Southern Company or Gulf Power coupled with an involuntary termination not for “Cause” or a voluntary termination for “Good Reason.” This means there is a “double trigger” before severance benefits are paid;i.e.,there must be both a change-in-controlchange in control and a termination of employment.
If the conditions described above are met, the named executive officers are entitled to severance payments equal to twoone or three times their base salary plus the annual incentiveperformance-based compensation amount assuming target-level performance. Most officers, including Gulf Power’s named executive officers, are entitled to severance payments equal to two times one timestheir base salary plus the annual incentivePerformance Pay Program amount assuming target-level performance. Ms. Story is entitled to the larger amount. These amounts are consistent with that provided by other companies of our size and in our industry and were established based on market-data provided
Prior to the Compensation Committee from its compensation consultant.changes made in 2009, the named executive officers, other than Ms. Story, were entitled to severance payments of two times their base salary plus the target-level annual Performance Pay Program amount. The changes made in 2009 also eliminated the broad-based change-in-control severance program.
More information about post-employment compensation, including severance arrangements under our change-in-control program, is included in the section entitled Potential Payments upon Termination or Change-in-Control.Change in Control.

III-17


Executive Stock Ownership Requirements
Effective January 1, 2006, the Compensation Committee adopted Common Stock ownership requirements for officers of Southern Company and its subsidiaries that are in a position of Vice Presidentvice president or above. All of the named executive officers are covered by the requirements. The guidelines were implemented to further align the interest of officers and Southern Company’s stockholders by promoting a long-term focus and long-term share ownership.
The types of ownership arrangements counted toward the requirements are shares owned outright, those held in Southern Company-sponsored plans, and Common Stock accounts in the Deferred Compensation Plan and the Supplemental Benefit Plan. One-third of vested Southern Company stock options may be counted, but if so, the ownership requirement is doubled.
The requirements are expressed as a multiple of base salary as per the table below.
     
  Multiple of Salary Without Multiple of Salary Counting
Name Counting Stock Options 1/3 of Vested Options
S. N. Story 3 Times 6 Times
R. R. Labrato2 Times4 Times
P. C. Raymond 2 Times 4 Times
P. B. Jacob 2 Times 4 Times
T. J. McCullough 1 TimeTimes 2 Times
B. C. Terry 2 Times 4 Times
Current officers have until September 30, 2011 to meet the applicable ownership requirement. Newly-elected officers have five years from the date of their election to meet the applicable ownership requirement.

III-16


Impact of Accounting and Tax Treatments on Compensation
None of the compensation paid to the Gulf Power’s employees, including the named executive officers, is subject to the restrictions under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Code).
Policy on Recovery of Awards
Southern Company’s 2006 Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan provides that if Southern Company or Gulf Power is required to prepare an accounting restatement due to material noncompliance as a result of misconduct, and if an executive officer knowingly or grossly negligently engaged in or failed to prevent the misconduct or is subject to automatic forfeiture under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the executive officer will reimburse Gulf Power the amount of any payment in settlement of awards earned or accrued during the 12-month period following the first public issuance or filing that was restated.
Southern Company Policy Regarding Hedging the Economic Risk of Stock Ownership
Southern Company’s policy is that insiders, including outside directors, will not trade in Southern Company options on the options market and will not engage in short sales.
2010 Executive Compensation Program Changes
In 2009, the Compensation Committee made certain key changes to the performance-based compensation program that affect all employees of Gulf Power, including the named executive officers. Changes were made to both the annual and long-term performance-based compensation programs.
Annual Performance Pay Program
For annual performance-based compensation to be earned in 2010, the Compensation Committee changed the goal weights and lowered the maximum payout opportunity. Under the program in effect since 2000, the 2009 goals were weighted 50% EPS and 50% ROE with an adjustment of plus or minus 10% based on operational goal performance. The maximum payout opportunity was 220% of the target opportunity. (For more information, see the description of the Performance Pay Program in the 2009 Performance Based Compensation section in this CD&A.) Under the program effective in 2010, the goals are weighted one-third EPS, one-third ROE, and one-third operational goals. The maximum payout opportunity is reduced to 200% of target.
Long-Term Performance-Based Compensation Program
The long-term performance-based compensation program that has been in effect for many years has consisted of stock options with associated performance dividends. Effective in 2010, stock options were granted without associated performance dividends. Performance dividends accounted for approximately 64% of the total long-term performance-based compensation target value for 2009. In 2010, stock options represent 40% of the total value and a new long-term performance-based compensation component was granted: performance share units. Performance share units represent 60% of the total long-term performance-based compensation target value. A grant date fair value per unit is determined. For the grant made in 2010, the value per unit was $30.13. The total target value for performance share units is divided by the value per unit to determine the number of performance share units granted to each participant, including the named executive officers. Each performance share unit represents one share of Common Stock. At the end of a three-year performance-measurement period, the number of units will be adjusted up or down (zero to 200%) based on Southern Company’s total shareholder return relative to that of its peers in the Philadelphia Utility Index and the custom peer group. (The performance metric, performance scale, and the peer groups used for the performance share units are the same as that currently used for the Performance Dividend Program.) The number of performance share units earned will be paid in Common Stock. No dividends or dividend equivalents will be paid or earned on the performance share units.
The Compensation Committee also approved a transition period for the Performance Dividend Program. There are three performance-measurement periods that are still open: 2007-2010, 2008-2011, and 2009-2012. For these open

III-18III-17


periods, the performance at the end of each period will be determined as described above in this CD&A, and the amount earned will be paid on the number of stock options granted prior to 2010 that a participant holds at the end of each period. Therefore, there will be three additional payouts under the Performance Dividend Program, but the number of stock options upon which payment will be based will be limited to those granted prior to 2010.
COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT
The Compensation Committee met with management to review and discuss the CD&A. Based on such review and discussion, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Southern Company Board of Directors that the CD&A be included in Gulf Power’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008.2009. The Southern Company Board of Directors approved that recommendation.
Members of the Compensation Committee:
J. Neal Purcell, Chair
JonHenry A. BosciaClark, III
H. William Habermeyer, Jr.
Donald M. James

III-18


SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE
The Summary Compensation Table shows the amount and type of compensation received by the Chief Executive Officer, any Chief Financial Officer, and the next three most highly-paid executive officers who served in 2008.2009. Collectively, these officers are referred to as the “named executive officers.”
                                                       
 Change in     Change in    
 Pension     Pension    
 Value and     Value and    
 Nonquali-     Nonquali-    
 Non- fied     Non- fied    
 Equity Deferred All   Equity Deferred All  
 Incentive Compensa Other   Incentive Compensa- Other  
 Stock Option Plan -tion Compen   Stock Option Plan tion Compensa-  
Name and Salary Bonus Awards Awards Compensation Earnings -sation Total Salary Bonus Awards Awards Compensation Earnings tion Total
Principal Position Year ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) Year ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($)
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j)
Susan N. Story
 2008 390,602 0 0 170,536 509,067 128,423 39,109 1,237,737  2009 411,318 0 0 180,401 455,257 403,615 41,374 1,491,965 
President, Chief 2007 366,578 0 0 164,686 404,421 231,120 37,196 1,204,001  2008 390,602 0 0 102,872 509,067 128,423 39,109 1,170,073 
Executive Officer, 2006 349,187 0 0 144,347 383,590 65,344 29,330 971,798  2007 366,578 0 0 179,105 404,421 231,120 37,196 1,218,420 
and Director  
Ronnie R. Labrato*
 2008 256,390 250 0 38,349 268,859 147,939 198,700 910,487 
Philip C. Raymond*
 2009 237,219 0 0 49,939 146,636 147,437 180,666 761,897 
Vice President and 2007 231,132 0 0 63,580 189,469 166,084 25,849 676,114  2008 215,880 23,731 0 21,283 181,206 48,120 44,446 534,666 
Chief Financial Officer 2006 219,732 7,500 0 60,598 182,948 71,618 25,945 568,341  
Philip C. Raymond**
 2008 215,880 23,731 0 38,676 181,206 48,120 44,446 552,059 
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer 
P. Bernard Jacob
 2008 227,419 0 0 32,670 181,151 103,293 22,219 566,752  2009 239,205 0 0 50,359 146,661 199,239 23,487 658,951 
Vice President 2007 213,374 0 0 57,371 152,730 125,674 22,726 571,875  2008 227,419 0 0 32,670 181,151 103,293 22,219 566,752 
 2006 199,142 0 0 54,938 156,439 53,935 18,699 483,153  2007 213,374 0 0 57,371 152,730 125,674 22,726 571,875 
Theodore J. McCullough***
 2008 180,717 0 0 21,540 139,937 30,798 78,720 451,712 
Theodore J. McCullough
 2009 190,010 0 0 26,667 105,148 111,520 17,805 451,150 
Vice President 2007 154,087 17,000 0 21,345 107,045 30,674 29,962 360,113  2008 180,717 0 0 20,790 139,937 30,798 78,720 450,962 
Bentina C. Terry***
 2008 222,172 5,150 0 35,751 166,985 13,845 26,250 470,153 
 2007 154,087 17,000 0 22,450 107,045 30,674 29,962 361,218 
Bentina C.Terry
 2009 237,219 0 0 49,939 134,728 48,437 25,427 495,750 
Vice President 2007 193,869 18,232 0 36,417 140,268 13,802 64,210 466,798  2008 222,172 5,150 0 ��30,616 166,985 13,845 26,250 465,018 
 2007 193,869 18,232 0 38,592 140,268 13,802 64,210 468,973 
 
* Mr. Labrato transferred to SCS to become the Vice President of Internal Auditing effective April 1, 2008.

III-19


**Mr. Raymond transferred from Alabama Power to become Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Gulf Power effective April 1, 2008.
***Ms. Terry and Mr. McCullough became an executive officersofficer of Gulf Power in March 2007 and August 2007, respectively.2008.
Column (d)
The amounts reported in this column are Southern Excellence Awards in the case of Ms. Terry and Messrs. Labrato and Raymond in 2008. Also, included in 2008 and 2007 are relocation incentives that are paid to employees who are promoted and relocate geographically, at the request of the employer which is a lump sum payment equal to 10% of base salary. Mr. Raymond relocated in 2008 and both Ms. Terry and Mr. McCullough relocated in 2007.
Column (e)
No equity-based compensation has been awarded to the named executive officers, or any other employees of Gulf Power, other than Stock Option Awards which are reported in column (f).
Column (f)
This column reports the dollar amounts recognized for financial statement reporting purposes with respect to 2008 in accordance with FASB Statement No. 123 (revised 2004), “Share-Based Payment” (SFAS No. 123R) disregarding any estimates of forfeitures relating to service-based vesting conditions.aggregate grant date fair value. See Note 8 to the financial statements of Gulf Power in Item 8 herein for a discussion of the assumptions used in calculating these amounts.

III-19


For Messrs. Labrato and Jacob, the amounts shown equal the grant date fair value for the 2008 options granted in 2008, as reported in the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table, because these named executive officers have been retirement eligible for several years and therefore their options will vest in full upon termination. Accordingly, under SFAS No. 123R, the full grant fair value of their option awards is expensed in the year of grant. However, for Mss. Story and Terry and Messrs. Raymond and McCullough, the amounts reported reflect the amounts expensed in 2008 attributable to the following stock option grants made in 2008 and in prior years because each of these named executive officers was not retirement eligible on the grant dates. Therefore, the grant date fair value for options granted to Mss. Story and Terry and Messrs. Raymond and McCullough is recognized over the shorter period of a) the vesting period of each option or b) the period to the date they become retirement eligible. The grant date fair value for the grant made in 2008 is reported in the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table.
                 
  Amount Expensed in 2008 ($)
Grant Date S. N. Story P. C. Raymond T. J. McCullough B. C. Terry
2005  6,718   1,650   953   1,678 
2006  57,192   12,292   7,070   12,322 
2007  60,809   14,025   7,490   12,876 
2008  45,817   10,709   6,027   8,875 
             
TOTAL  170,536   38,676   21,540   35,751 
Column (g)
The amounts in this column are the aggregate of the payouts under the annual incentive programPerformance Pay Program and the performance dividend programPerformance Dividend Program attributable to performance periods endingended December 31, 20082009 that are discussed in detail in the CD&A. The amounts paid under each program to the named executive officers are shown below:below.
            
             Annual Performance-    
Name Annual Incentive ($) Performance Dividends ($) Total ($) Based Compensation ($) Performance Dividends ($) Total ($)
S. N. Story 292,310 216,757 509,067  161,602 293,655 455,257 
R. R. Labrato 168,021 100,838 268,859 
P. C. Raymond 126,586 54,620 181,206  69,901 76,735 146,636 
P. B. Jacob 127,496 53,655 181,151  70,486 76,175 146,661 
T. J. McCullough 98,073 41,864 139,937  53,428 51,720 105,148 
B. C. Terry 126,438 40,547 166,985  69,901 64,827 134,728 

III-20


§Column (h)
This column reports the aggregate change in the actuarial present value of each named executive officer’s accumulated benefit under the Pension Plan and the supplemental pension plans (collectively, Pension Benefits) during 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2008.2009. The amount included for 20062007 is the difference between the actuarial present values of the Pension Benefits measured as of September 30, 2005 and September 30, 2006 and the 2007 amount is the difference in the actuarial present values of the Pension Benefits measured as of September 30, 2006 and September 30, 2007. However, the amount for 2008 is the difference between the actuarial values of the Pension Benefits measured as of September 30, 2007 and December 31, 2008 - 15 months rather than one year. September 30 was used as the measurement date prior to 2008, because it was the date as of which Southern Company measured its retirement benefit obligations for accounting purposes. Starting in 2008, Southern Company changed its measurement date to December 31. The amount for 2009 is the difference between the actuarial values of the Pension Benefits measured as of December 31, to comply with FASB Statement No. 158, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension2008 and Other Postretirement Plans.”December 31, 2009. The Pension Benefits as of each measurement date are based on the named executive officer’s age, pay, and service accruals and the plan provisions applicable as of the measurement date. The actuarial present values as of each measurement date reflect the assumptions Gulf Power selected for FASB Statement No. 87, “Employers’ Accounting for Pensions” cost purposes as of that measurement date; however, the named executive officers were assumed to remain employed at Gulf Power or other Southern Company subsidiary until their benefits commence at the pension plans’ stated normal retirement date, generally age 65. As a result, the amounts in column (h) related to Pension Benefits represent the combined impact of several factors—factors: growth in the named executive officer’s Pension Benefits over the measurement year; impact on the total present values of one year shorter discounting period due to the named executive officer being one year closer to normal retirement; impact on the total present values attributable to changes in assumptions from measurement date to measurement date; and impact on the total present values attributable to plan changes between measurement dates.
The Pension Plans’ provisions were substantively the same as of September 30, 2005 and September 30, 2006. However, the present values of accumulated Pension Benefits as of September 30, 2007 reflect new provisions regarding the form and timing of payments from the supplemental pension plans. These changes bringbrought those plans into compliance with Section 409A of the Code. The key change was to the form of payment. Instead of providing monthly payments for the lifetime of each named executive officer and his/her spouse, these plans will pay the single sum value of those benefits for an average lifetime in 10 annual installments. Calculations of the present value of accumulated benefits calculations shown prior to September 30, 2007 reflect supplemental pension benefits being paid monthly for the lifetimes of named executive officers and their spouses. The 2007 change in pension value reported in column (h) for each named executive officer is greater than what it otherwise would have been due to the change in the form of payment.
For more information about the Pension Benefits and the assumptions used to calculate the actuarial present value of accumulated benefits as of December 31, 2008,2009, see the information following the Pension Benefits Table.table. The key differences between assumptions used for the actuarial present values of accumulated benefits calculations as of September 30, 2007December 31, 2008 and December 31, 20082009 follow:
§ Discount rate for the Pension Plan was increaseddecreased to 5.95% as of December 31, 2009 from 6.75% as of December 31, 2008 from 6.3% as of September 30, 2007.
 
§ 15-month measurement period,Discount rate for the supplemental pension plans was decreased to 5.60% as described above.of December 31, 2009 from 6.75% as of December 31, 2008

III-20


§Unpaid annual performance-based compensation was assumed to be 130% of target as of December 31, 2009 and 135% of target was assumed as of December 31, 2008
This column also reports above-market earnings on deferred compensation under the Deferred Compensation Plan (DCP). There were no above-market earnings on deferred compensation in 2008.2009. For more information about the DCP, see the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Tabletable and information accompanying it.

III-21


The table below itemizes the amounts reported in this column.
                
                    
 Change in Above-Market   Change in Above-Market  
 Pension Earnings on Deferred   Pension Earnings on Deferred  
 Value Compensation Total Value Compensation Total
Name Year ($) ($) ($) Year ($) ($) ($)
S. N. Story 2008 128,423 0 128,423  2009 403,615 0 403,615 
 2007 221,213 9,907 231,120  2008 128,423 0 128,423 
 2006 56,406 8,938 65,344  2007 221,213 9,907 231,120 
R. R. Labrato 2008 147,939 0 147,939 
P. C. Raymond 2009 147,437 0 147,437 
 2007 165,758 326 166,084  2008 48,120 0 48,120 
 2006 71,618 0 71,618 
P. C. Raymond 2008 48,120 0 48,120 
P.B. Jacob 2008 103,293 0 103,293 
P. B. Jacob 2009 199,239 0 199,239 
 2007 125,316 358 125,674  2008 103,293 0 103,293 
 2006 53,721 214 53,935  2007 125,316 358 125,674 
T. J. McCullough 2008 30,798 0 30,798  2009 111,520 0 111,520 
 2007 30,607 67 30,674  2008 30,798 0 30,798 
 2007 30,607 67 30,674 
B. C. Terry 2008 13,845 0 13,845  2009 48,437 0 48,437 
 2007 13,729 73 13,802  2008 13,845 0 13,845 
 2007 13,729 73 13,802 
Column (i)
This column reports the following items: perquisites; tax reimbursements by the employing company on certain perquisites; the employing company’s contributions in 20082009 to the Southern Company Employee Savings Plan (ESP), which is a tax-qualified defined contribution plan intended to meet requirements of Section 401(k) of the Code; and the employing company’s contributions in 20082009 under the Southern Company Supplemental Benefit Plan (Non-Pension Related) (SBP). The SBP is described more fully in the information following the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Table.table.
The amounts reported are itemized below.
                                        
 Tax       Tax      
 Perquisites Reimbursements ESP SBP Total Perquisites Reimbursements ESP SBP Total
Name ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($)
S. N. Story 13,225 5,963 11,730 8,191 39,109  20,391 6 12,495 8,482 41,374 
R. R. Labrato 120,364 65,651 11,339 1,346 198,700 
P. C. Raymond 30,014 3,422 11,010 0 44,446  123,748 44,820 12,098 0 180,666 
P. B. Jacob 9,339 2,969 9,911 0 22,219  9,838 3,088 10,561 0 23,487 
T. J. McCullough 62,074 7,430 9,216 0 78,720  7,346 1,220 9,239 0 17,805 
B. C. Terry 9,993 6,327 9,930 0 26,250  10,358 4,479 10,590 0 25,427 

III-21


Description of Perquisites
Personal Financial Planningis provided for most officers of Gulf Power, including all of the named executive officers. Gulf Power pays for the services of the financial planner on behalf of the officers, up to a maximum amount of $8,700 per year, after the initial year that the benefit is provided. In the initial year, the allowed amount is $15,000. The employing company also provides a five-year allowance of $6,000 for estate planning and tax return preparation fees.
Personal Use of Company-Provided Club Memberships.The employing company provides club memberships to certain officers, including all of the named executive officers. The memberships are provided for business use; however, personal use is permitted. The amount included reflects the pro-rata portion of the membership fees paid by the employing company that are attributable to the named executive officers’ personal use. Direct costs associated with any personal use, such as meals, are paid for or reimbursed by the employee and therefore are not included.

III-22


Relocation Benefits.These benefits are provided to cover the costs associated with geographic relocation. In 2008, Messrs. Labrato, McCullough, and2009, Mr. Raymond received relocation benefits in the amountsamount of $113,373, $23,344 and $25,650, respectively.$110,596.
Personal Use of Corporate-Owned Aircraft.Southern Company owns aircraft that are used to facilitate business travel. All flights on these aircraft must have a business purpose. Also, ifIf seating is available, Southern Company permits a spouse or other family member to accompany an employee on a flight. However, because in such cases the aircraft is being used for a business purpose, there is no incremental cost associated with the spousalfamily travel and no amounts are included for such travel. Any additional expenses incurred that are related to spousalfamily travel are included.
For Mr. McCullough, $31,708 of the $62,074 Also, for Ms. Story only, effective in 2008 represents the incremental cost of2009, limited personal use of corporate-owned aircraft for relocation purposes. Mr. McCullough relocated from Athens, Georgia to Pensacola, Florida and was permitted tothat is associated with business travel to and from his homeis permitted; however, she had no such use in Athens for a period of time in late 2007 through early 2008. For Mr. Raymond, $1,232 of $30,014 in 2008 represents the incremental cost of use of corporate-owned aircraft for relocation purposes. Mr. Raymond is relocating from Birmingham, Alabama to Pensacola, Florida. The incremental costs reported are the fuel costs for relocation flights plus any incidental costs incurred, such as associated hotel and meal expenses for pilots.2009.
Home Security Systems.Gulf Power pays for the services of third-party providers for the installation, maintenance, and monitoring of Ms. Story’sthe named executive officers’ home security system.systems.
Other Miscellaneous Perquisites.The amount included reflects the full cost to Gulf Power of providing the following items: personal use of company provided tickets for sporting and other entertainment events and gifts distributed to and activities provided to attendees at company-sponsored events.
For Ms. Story, effective in 2009, tax reimbursements are no longer made on perquisites, except on any relocation benefits.

III-22


GRANTS OF PLAN-BASED AWARDS MADE IN 20082009
The Grants of Plan-Based Awards TableThis table provides information on stock option grants made and goals established for future payouts under Gulf Power’s incentiveperformance-based compensation programs during 20082009 by the Compensation Committee. In this table, the annual incentivePerformance Pay Program and the performance dividend payouts are referred to as PPP and PDP, respectively.
                                              
 Grant Grant
 Closing Date Date
 All Other Price Fair All Other Fair
 Option on Last Value Option Value
 Awards: Exercise Trading of Awards: Exercise of
 Number of or Base Date Stock Number of or Base Stock
 Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-Equity Securities Price of Prior to and Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-Equity Securities Price of and
 Incentive Plan Awards Underlying Option Grant Option Incentive Plan Awards Underlying Option Option
 Grant Threshold Target Maximum Options Awards Date Awards Grant Threshold Target Maximum Options Awards Awards
Name Date ($) ($) ($) (#) ($/Sh) ($/Sh) ($) Date ($) ($) ($) (#) ($/Sh) ($)
(a) (b)   (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h)
S. N. Story 2/18/2008 PPP 106,943 237,650 522,831 43,406 35.78 35.78 102,872  2/16/2009 PPP  2,139   237,650   522,830          
 PDP 13,860 138,599 277,199  PDP  11,546   230,920   461,839   100,223   31.39   180,401 
R. R. Labrato 2/18/2008 PPP 53,156 118,125 259,875 16,181 35.78 35.78 38,349 
 PDP 6,448 64,478 128,957 
P. C. Raymond 2/18/2008 PPP 44,921 99,825 219,615 8,980 35.78 35.78 21,283  2/16/2009 PPP  925   102,795   226,149          
 PDP 3,492 34,925 69,850  PDP  3,017   60,342   120,683   27,744   31.39   49,939 
P. B. Jacob 2/18/2008 PPP 46,645 103,656 228,043 13,785 35.78 35.78 32,670  2/16/2009 PPP  933   103,656   228,043          
 PDP 3,431 34,308 68,616  PDP  2,995   59,901   119,803   27,977   31.39   50,359 
T. J. McCullough 2/18/2008 PPP 32,935 73,189 161,016 8,772 35.78 35.78 20,790  2/16/2009 PPP  659   73,189   161,016          
 PDP 2,677 26,769 53,537  PDP  2,034   40,671   81,341   14,815   31.39   26,667 
B. C. Terry 2/18/2008 PPP 46,258 102,795 226,149 12,918 35.78 35.78 30,616  2/16/2009 ��PPP  925   102,795   226,149          
 PDP 2,593 25,927 51,853  PDP  2,549   50,978   101,956   27,744   31.39   49,939 

III-23


Columns (c), (d), and (e)
The amounts reported as PPP reflect the amounts established by the Compensation Committee in early 20082009 to be paid for certain levels of performance as of December 31, 20082009 under the annual incentive program. ThePerformance Pay Program. Under that program, the Compensation Committee assigns each named executive officer a target incentive opportunity, expressed as a percentage of base salary, thatwhich is paid for target-level performance under the annual incentive program.Performance Pay Program. The target incentive opportunities established for the named executive officers for 20082009 performance were 60% for Ms. Story, 45% for Ms. Terry and Messrs. Labrato, Jacob and Raymond, and 40% for Mr. McCullough. Due to a change in job assignment in 2008, the target incentive opportunity for Mr. Raymond was 40% for a portion of 2008. The payout for threshold performance was set at 0.45 timesa determined amount of less than one percent of the target incentive opportunity and the maximum amount payable was set at 2.20 times the target. The amount paid to each named executive officer under the annual incentive programPerformance Pay Program for actual 20082009 performance is included in the Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation column in the Summary Compensation Table and is itemized in the notes following that table. More information about the annual incentive program,Performance Pay Program, including the applicable performance criteria established by the Compensation Committee, is provided in the CD&A.
Southern Company also has a long-term incentiveperformance-based compensation program, the performance dividend program, thatPerformance Dividend Program, which has been adopted by Gulf Power and SCS. It pays performance-based dividend equivalents based on Southern Company’s total shareholder return (TSR) compared with the TSR of its peer companies over a four-year performance-measurement period. The Compensation Committee establishes the level of payout for prescribed levels of performance over the performance-measurement period.
In February 2008,2009, the Compensation Committee established the performance dividend programPerformance Dividend Program goal for the four-year performance-measurement period beginning on January 1, 20082009 and ending on December 31, 2011.2012. The amount earned in 20112012 based on the performance for 2008-20112009-2012 will be paid following the end of the period. However, no amount is earned and paid unless the Compensation Committee approves the payment at the beginning

III-23


of the final year of the performance-measurement period. Also, nothing is earned unless Southern Company’s earnings are sufficient to fund a Common Stock dividend at least equal to that paid in the prior year.
The performance dividend programPerformance Dividend Program pays to all option holders a percentage of the Common Stock dividend paid to Southern Company’s stockholders in the last year of the performance-measurement period. It can range from approximately five percent2.5% for performance above the 10th percentile compared with the performance of the peer companies to 100% of the dividend if Southern Company’s TSRtotal shareholder return is at or above the 90th percentile. That amount is then paid per option granted prior to 2010 and held at the end of the four-year period. The amount, if any, ultimately paid to the option holders, including the named executive officers, at the end of the last year of the 2008-20112009-2012 performance-measurement period will be based on (1) Southern Company’s TSRaverage total shareholder return compared to that of its peer companies as of December 31, 2011,2012, (2) the actual dividend paid in 20112012 to Southern Company’s stockholders, if any, and (3) the number of options granted prior to 2010 held by the named executive officers on December 31, 2011.2012.
The number of options held on December 31, 20112012 will be affected by the number of additional options granted to the named executive officers prior to December 31, 2011, if any, and the number of options exercised by the named executive officers prior to December 31, 2011,2012, if any. None of these components necessary to calculate the range of payout under the performance dividend programPerformance Dividend Program for the 2008-20112009-2012 performance-measurement period is known at the time the goal is established.
The amounts reported as PDP in columns (c), (d), and (e) were calculated based on the number of options held by the named executive officers on December 31, 2008,2009, as reported in columns (b) and (c) of the Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End Tabletable and the Common Stock dividend of $1.6625$1.73 per share paid to Southern Company’s stockholders in 2008.2009. These factors are itemized below.

III-24


                                
 Stock   Stock      
 Options Held Performance Dividend Performance Dividend Options Held Performance Dividend   Performance Dividend
 as of Per Option Performance Dividend Per Option Paid at as of Per Option Performance Dividend Per Option Paid at
 December Paid at Threshold Per Option Paid at Maximum December Paid at Threshold Per Option Paid at Maximum
 31, 2008 Performance Target Performance Performance 31, 2009 Performance Target Performance Performance
Name (#) ($) ($) ($) (#) ($) ($) ($)
S. N. Story 166,736 0.083125 0.83125 1.6625  266,959 0.04325 0.86500 1.7300 
R. R. Labrato 77,568 0.083125 0.83125 1.6625 
P. C. Raymond 42,015 0.083125 0.83125 1.6625  69,759 0.04325 0.86500 1.7300 
P. B. Jacob 41,273 0.083125 0.83125 1.6625  69,250 0.04325 0.86500 1.7300 
T. J. McCullough 32,203 0.083125 0.83125 1.6625  47,018 0.04325 0.86500 1.7300 
B. C. Terry 31,190 0.083125 0.83125 1.6625  58,934 0.04325 0.86500 1.7300 
More information about the PDPPerformance Dividend Program is provided in the CD&A.
Columns (f), and (g), and (h)
The stock options vest at the rate of one-third per year, on the anniversary date of the grant. Also, grants fully vest upon termination as a result of death, total disability, or retirement and expire five years after retirement, three years after death or total disability, or their normal expiration date if earlier. Please see Potential Payments Uponupon Termination or Change-in-ControlChange in Control for more information about the treatment of stock options under different termination and change-in-control events.
The Compensation Committee granted these stock options to the named executive officers at its regularly-scheduled meeting on February 18, 2008.19, 2009. Under the terms of the Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan, the exercise price was set at the closing price ($35.7831.39 per share) on the last trading day prior to the grant date which wasof February 15, 2008.16, 2009.
Column (i)(h)
The value of stock options granted in 20082009 was derived using the Black-Scholes stock option pricing model. The assumptions used in calculating these amounts are discussed in Note 8 to the financial statements of Gulf Power in Item 8 herein.

III-25III-24


OUTSTANDING EQUITY AWARDS AT 20082009 FISCAL YEAR-END
This table provides information pertaining to all outstanding stock options held by the named executive officers as of December 31, 2008.2009.
                                                        
 Stock Awards Stock Awards
 Equity Equity
 Equity Incentive Equity Incentive
 Incentive Plan Incentive Plan
 Plan Awards: Plan Awards:
 Awards: Market or Awards: Market or
 Option Awards Number Number Payout Option Awards Number Number Payout
 Equity of of Value of Equity of of Value of
 Incentive Plan Shares Market Unearned Unearned Incentive Plan Shares Market Unearned Unearned
 Number Awards: or Units Value of Shares, Shares, Number Awards: or Units Value of Shares, Shares,
 of Number of Number of of Shares or Units or Units or of Number of Number of of Shares or Units or Units or
 Securities Securities Securities Stock Units of Other Other Securities Securities Securities Stock Units of Other Other
 Underlying Underlying Underlying That Stock Rights Rights Underlying Underlying Underlying That Stock Rights Rights
 Unexercised Unexercised Unexercised Option Have That Have That Have That Have Unexercised Unexercised Unexercised Option Have That Have That Have That Have
 Options Options Unearned Exercise Option Not Not Not Not Options Options Unearned Exercise Option Not Not Not Not
 (#) (#) Options Price Expiration Vested Vested Vested Vested (#) (#) Options Price Expiration Vested Vested Vested Vested
Name Exercisable Unexercisable (#) ($) Date (#) ($) (#) ($) Exercisable Unexercisable (#) ($) Date (#) ($) (#) ($)
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j)
S. N. Story 38,529 0 0 32.70 02/18/2015 0 0 0 0  38,529 0  32.70 02/18/2015     
 27,553 13,776 33.81 02/20/2016 
 14,491 28,981 36.42 02/19/2017 
 0 43,406 35.78 02/18/2018 
R. R. Labrato 15,646 0 0 29.50 02/13/2014 0 0 0 0 
 15,707 0 32.70 02/18/2015  41,329 0 33.81 02/20/2016 
 9,735 4,867 33.81 02/20/2016  28,981 14,491 36.42 02/19/2017 
 5,144 10,288 36.42 02/19/2017  14,469 28,937 35.78 02/18/2018 
 0 16,181 35.78 02/18/2018  0 100,223 31.39 02/16/2019 
P. C. Raymond 1,230 0 0 27.975 02/14/2013 0 0 0 0  1,230 0  27.98 02/14/2013     
 4,196 0 29.50 02/13/2014  4,196 0 29.50 02/13/2014 
 9,463 0 32.70 02/18/2015  9,463 0 32.70 02/18/2015 
 5,921 2,961 33.81 02/20/2016  8,882 0 33.81 02/20/2016 
 3,088 6,176 36.42 02/19/2017  6,176 3,088 36.42 02/19/2017 
 0 8,980 35.78 02/18/2018  2,994 5,986 35.78 02/18/2018 
 0 27,744 31.39 02/16/2019 
P. B. Jacob 4,738 0 0 32.70 02/18/2015 0 0 0 0  4,738 0  32.70 02/18/2015     
 8,825 0 33.81 02/20/2016 
 4,412 4,413 33.81 02/20/2016  9,283 4,642 36.42 02/19/2017 
 4,642 9,283 36.42 02/19/2017  4,595 9,190 35.78 02/18/2018 
 0 13,785 35.78 02/18/2018  0 27,977 31.39 02/16/2019 
T. J. McCullough 1,985 0 0 27.975 02/14/2013 0 0 0 0  1,985 0  27.98 02/14/2013     
 5,421 0 29.50 02/13/2014  5,421 0 29.50 02/13/2014 
 5,468 0 32.70 02/18/2015  5,468 0 32.70 02/18/2015 
 3,405 1,703 33.81 02/20/2016  5,108 0 33.81 02/20/2016 
 1,817 3,632 36.42 02/19/2017  3,633 1,816 36.42 02/19/2017 
 0 8,772 35.78 02/18/2018  2,924 5,848 35.78 02/18/2018 
 0 14,815 31.39 02/16/2019 
B. C. Terry 5,937 2,968 0 33.81 02/20/2016 0 0 0 0  8,905 0  33.81 02/20/2016     
 3,123 6,244 36.42 02/19/2017  6,245 3,122 36.42 02/19/2017 
 0 12,918 35.78 02/18/2018  4,306 8,612 35.78 02/18/2018 
 0 27,744 31.39 02/16/2019 

III-26III-25


Stock options vest one-third per year on the anniversary of the grant date. Options granted from 2002 through 20052006 with expiration dates from 2012 through 20152016 were fully vested as of December 31, 2008.2009. The options granted in 2006, 2007, 2008, and 20082009 become fully vested as shown below.
     
Year Option Granted Expiration Date Date Fully Vested
2006February 20, 2016February 20, 2009
2007 February 19, 2017 February 19, 2010
2008 February 18, 2018 February 18, 2011
2009February 16, 2019February 16, 2012
Options also fully vest upon death, total disability, or retirement and expire three years following death or total disability or five years following retirement, or on the original expiration date if earlier. Please see Potential Payments Uponupon Termination or Change-in-ControlChange in Control for more information about the treatment of stock options under different termination and change-in-control events.
OPTION EXERCISES AND STOCK VESTED IN 20082009
None of the named executive officers exercised stock options in 2009 and none were granted Stock Awards.
                                
 Option Awards Stock Awards Option Awards Stock Awards
 Number of Shares Number of Shares   Number of Shares Number of Shares 
 Acquired on Value Realized on Acquired on Value Realized on Acquired on Value Realized on Acquired on Value Realized on
Name Exercise (#) Exercise ($) Vesting (#) Vesting ($) Exercise (#) Exercise ($) Vesting (#) Vesting ($)
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (b) (c) (d) (e)
S. N. Story 37,837 218,149 0 0  0 0   
R. R. Labrato 11,530 138,648 0 0 
P. C. Raymond 0 0 0 0  0 0   
P. B. Jacob 0 0 0 0  0 0   
T. J. McCullough 3,596 45,400 0 0  0 0   
B. C. Terry 9,625 42,559 0 0  0 0   
PENSION BENEFITS AT 20082009 FISCAL YEAR-END
                        
 Payments Payments
 Number of Present Value of During Number of Present Value of During
 Years Credited Accumulated Last Fiscal Years Credited Accumulated Last Fiscal
Name Plan Name Service (#) Benefit ($) Year ($) Plan Name Service (#) Benefit ($) Year ($)
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (b) (c) (d) (e)
S. N. Story Pension Plan 26.00 348,397 0  Pension Plan  27.00   493,190   0 
 SBP-P 26.00 589,275 0 
 SERP 26.00 238,648 0 
R. R. Labrato Pension Plan 28.75 579,765 0 
 SBP-P 28.75 276,849 0  SBP-P  27.00   769,884   0 
 SERP 28.75 183,696 0  SERP  27.00   316,861   0 
P. C. Raymond Pension Plan 17.00 191,680 0  Pension Plan  18.00   285,396   0 
 SBP-P 17.00 60,181 0  SBP-P  18.00   80,192   0 
 SERP 17.00 52,713 0  SERP  18.00   86,423   0 
P. B. Jacob Pension Plan 25.42 448,190 0  Pension Plan  26.42   599,150   0 
 SBP-P 25.42 173,149 0  SBP-P  26.42   194,082   0 
 SERP 25.42 131,237 0  SERP  26.42   158,583   0 
T. J. McCullough Pension Plan 20.75 167,610 0  Pension Plan  21.75   241,527   0 
 SBP-P 20.75 31,768 0  SBP-P  21.75   51,546   0 
 SERP 20.75 41,183 0  SERP  21.75   59,008   0 
B. C. Terry Pension Plan 6.50 40,633 0  Pension Plan  7.50   72,732   0 
 SBP-P 6.50 10,863 0  SBP-P  7.50   16,383   0 
 SERP 6.50 12,620 0  SERP  7.50   23,438   0 

III-27


The named executive officers earn employer-paid pension benefits from three integratedcoordinated retirement plans. More information about pension benefits is provided in the CD&A.

III-26


The Pension Plan
The Pension Plan is a tax-qualified, funded plan. It is Southern Company’s primary retirement plan. Generally, all full-time employees participate in this plan after one year of service. Normal retirement benefits become payable when participants both attain age 65 and complete five years of participation. The plan benefit equals the greater of amounts computed using a “1.7% offset formula” and a “1.25% formula,” as described below. Benefits are limited to a statutory maximum.
The 1.7% offset formula amount equals 1.7% of final average pay times years of participation less an offset related to Social Security benefits. The offset equals a service ratio times 50% of the anticipated Social Security benefits in excess of $4,200. The service ratio adjusts the offset for the portion of a full career that a participant has worked. The highest three rates of pay out of a participant’s last 10 calendar years of service are averaged to derive final average pay. The pay considered for this formula is the base rate of pay reduced for any voluntary deferrals. A statutory limit restricts the amount considered each year; the limit for 20082009 was $230,000.$245,000.
The 1.25% formula amount equals 1.25% of final average pay times years of participation. For this formula, the final average pay computation is the same as above, but annual cash incentivesperformance-based compensation paid during each year areis added to the base rates of pay.
Early retirement benefits become payable once plan participants have during employment both attained age 50 and completed 10 years of participation. Participants who retire early from active service receive benefits equal to the amounts computed using the same formulas employed at normal retirement. However, a 0.3% reduction applies for each month (3.6% for each year) prior to normal retirement that participants elect to have their benefit payments commence. For example, 64% of the formula benefits are payable starting at age 55. As of December 31, 2008,2009, only Messrs. LabratoJacob and JacobRaymond were eligible to retire immediately.
The Pension Plan’s benefit formulas produce amounts payable monthly over a participant’s post-retirement lifetime. At retirement, plan participants can choose to receive their benefits in one of seven alternative forms of payment. All forms pay benefits monthly over the lifetime of the retiree or the joint lifetimes of the retiree and a spouse. A reduction applies if a retiring participant chooses a payment form other than a single life annuity. The reduction makes the value of the benefits paid in the form chosen comparable to what it would have been if benefits were paid as a single life annuity over the retiree’s life.
Participants vest in the Pension Plan after completing five years of service. All the named executive officers are vested in their Pension Plan benefits. Participants who terminate employment after vesting can elect to have their pension benefits commencing at age 50 if they participated in the Pension Plan for 10 years. If such an election is made, the early retirement reductions that apply are actuarially determined factors and are larger than 0.3% per month.
If a participant dies while actively employed, benefits will be paid to a surviving spouse. A survivor’s benefit equals 45% of the monthly benefit that the participant had earned before his or her death. Payments to a surviving spouse of a participant who could have retired will begin immediately. Payments to a survivor of a participant who was not retirement eligibleretirement-eligible will begin when the deceased participant would have attained age 50. After commencing, survivor benefits are payable monthly for the remainder of a survivor’s life. Participants who are eligible for early retirement may opt to have an 80% survivor benefit paid if they die; however, there is a charge associated with this election.
If participants become totally disabled, periods that Social Security or employer providedemployer-provided disability income benefits are paid will count as service for benefit calculation purposes. The crediting of this additional service ceases at the point a disabled participant elects to commence retirement payments. Outside of the extra service crediting, the normal plan provisions apply to disabled participants.

III-28III-27


The Southern Company Supplemental Benefit Plan (Pension-Related) (SBP-P)
The SBP-P is an unfunded retirement plan that is not tax qualified. This plan provides to high-paid employees any benefits that the Pension Plan cannot pay due to statutory pay/benefit limits and voluntary pay deferrals. The SBP-P’s vesting, early retirement, and disability provisions mirror those of the Pension Plan.
The amounts paid by the SBP-P are based on the additional monthly benefit that the Pension Plan would pay if the statutory limits and pay deferrals were ignored. When an SBP-P participant separates from service, vested monthly benefits provided by the benefit formulas are converted into a single sum value. It equals the present value of what would have been paid monthly for an actuarially determined average post-retirement lifetime. The discount rate used in the calculation is based on the 30-year Treasury yields for the September preceding the calendar year of separation, but not more than six percent. Vested participants terminating prior to becoming eligible to retire will be paid their single sum value as of September 1 following the calendar year of separation. If the terminating participant is retirement eligible, the single sum value will be paid in 10 annual installments starting shortly after separation. The unpaid balance of a retiree’s single sum will be credited with interest at the prime rate published in The Wall Street Journal.Journal. If the separating participant is a “key man” under Section 409A of the Code, the first installment will be delayed for six months after the date of separation.
If an SBP-P participant dies after becoming vested in the Pension Plan, the spouse of the deceased participant will receive the installments the participant would have been paid upon retirement. If a vested participant’s death occurs prior to age 50, the installments will be paid to a survivor as if the participant had survived to age 50.
The Southern Company Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (SERP)
The SERP also is an unfunded retirement plan that is not tax qualified. This plan provides to high paidhigh-paid employees additional benefits that the Pension Plan and the SBP-P would pay if the 1.7% offset formula calculations reflected a portion of annual cash incentives. To derive the SERP benefits, a final average pay is determined reflecting participants’ base rates of pay and their incentivesannual performance-based compensation amounts to the extent they exceed 15% of those base rates (ignoring statutory limits and pay deferrals). This final average pay is used in the 1.7% offset formula to derive a gross benefit. The Pension Plan and the SBP-P benefits are subtracted from the gross benefit to calculate the SERP benefit. The SERP’s early retirement, survivor benefit, and disability provisions mirror the SBP-P’s provisions. However, except upon a change-in-control,change in control, SERP benefits do not vest until participants retire, so no benefits are paid if a participant terminates prior to becoming eligible to retire. More information about vesting and payment of SERP benefits following a change-in-controlchange in control is included in the section entitled Potential Payments Uponupon Termination or Change-in-Control.Change in Control.
The following assumptions were used in the present value calculations:
 Discount rate — 6.75%5.95% Pension Plan and 5.60% supplemental plans as of December 31, 20082009
 
 Retirement date — Normal retirement age (65 for all named executive officers)
 
 Mortality after normal retirement — RP2000 Combined Healthy with generational projections
 
 Mortality, withdrawal, disability, and retirement rates prior to normal retirement — None
 
 Form of payment for Pension Benefits
 o UnmarriedMale retirees: 100% elect a25% single life annuity; 25% level income annuity; 25% joint and 50% survivor annuity; and 25% joint and 100% survivor annuity
 
 o MarriedFemale retirees: 20% elect a40% single life annuity; 40% elect alevel income annuity; 10% joint and 50% survivor annuity; and 40% elect a10% joint and 100% survivor annuity
Percent married at retirement — 80% of males and 70% of females
 Spouse ages — Wives two years younger than their husbands
 
 IncentivesAnnual performance-based compensation earned but unpaid as of the measurement date — 135%130% of target opportunity percentages times base rate of pay for year incentiveamount is earned.
 
 Installment determination—4.75%4.25% discount rate for single sum calculation and 6.75%5.25% prime rate during installment payment period

III-29


For all of the named executive officers, the number of years of credited service is one year less than the number of years of employment.

III-28


NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION AS OF 20082009 FISCAL YEAR-END
                                        
 Executive Registrant Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Executive Registrant Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate
 Contributions Contributions Earnings Withdrawals/ Balance Contributions Contributions Earnings Withdrawals/ Balance
 in Last FY in Last FY in Last FY Distributions at Last FYE in Last FY in Last FY in Last FY Distributions at Last FYE
Name ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($)
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f)
S. N. Story 0 8,191 56,719 0 1,561,209  0 8,482 22,005 0 1,591,696 
R. R. Labrato 44,153 1,346 4,228 0 106,305 
P. C. Raymond 0 0 0 0 497  0 0  (23) 0 473 
P. B. Jacob 15,943 0 2,878 0 66,086  53,655 0 14,824 0 134,565 
T. J. McCullough 9,137 0 849 0 45,410  9,807 0 3,477 0 58,694 
B. C. Terry 62,044 0 2,408 0 66,196  0 0 2,045 0 68,241 
Southern Company provides the DCP which is designed to permit participants to defer income as well as certain federal, state, and local taxes until a specified date or their retirement, or other separation from service. Up to 50% of base salary and up to 100% of the annual incentive and performance dividendsperformance-based compensation, except stock options, may be deferred, at the election of eligible employees. All of the named executive officers are eligible to participate in the DCP.
Participants have two options for the deemed investments of the amounts deferred — the Stock Equivalent Account and the Prime Equivalent Account. Under the terms of the DCP, participants are permitted to transfer between investments at any time.
The amounts deferred in the Stock Equivalent Account are treated as if invested at an equivalent rate of return to that of an actual investment in Common Stock, including the crediting of dividend equivalents as such are paid by Southern Company from time to time. It provides participants with an equivalent opportunity for the capital appreciation (or loss) and income held byof that of a Southern Company stockholder. During 2008,2009, the rate of return in the Stock Equivalent Account was 0.03%(4.83%), which was Southern Company’s TSR for 2008.2009.
Alternatively, participants may elect to have their deferred compensation deemed invested in the Prime Equivalent Account which is treated as if invested at a prime interest rate compounded monthly, as published in theThe Wall Street Journalas the base rate on corporate loans posted as of the last business day of each month by at least 75% of the United States’ largest banks. The range of interest ratesrate earned on amounts deferred during 20082009 in the Prime Equivalent Account was 3.25% to 6.0%.
Column (b)
This column reports the actual amounts of compensation deferred under the DCP by each named executive officer in 2008.2009. The amount of salary deferred by the named executive officers, if any, is included in the Salary column in the Summary Compensation Table. The amountamounts of incentiveperformance-based compensation deferred in 2008 was2009 were the amountamounts paid for performance under the annual incentive programPerformance Pay Program and the performance dividend programPerformance Dividend Program that were earned as of December 31, 20072008 but not payable until the first quarter of 2008. This amount is2009. These amounts are not reflected in the Summary Compensation Table because that table reports incentiveperformance-based compensation that was earned in 2008,2009, but not payable until early 2009.2010. These deferred amounts may be distributed in a lump sum or in up to 10 annual installments at termination of employment or in a lump sum at a specified date, at the election of the participant.

III-30


Column (c)
This column reflects contributions under the SBP. Under the Code, employer matching contributions are prohibited under the ESP on employee contributions above stated limits in the ESP, and, if applicable, above legal limits set forth in the Code. The SBP is a nonqualified deferred compensation plan under which contributions are made that are prohibited from being made in the ESP. The contributions are treated as if invested in Common Stock and are payable in cash upon termination of employment in a lump sum or in up to 20 annual installments, at the election of

III-29


the participant. The amounts reported in this column also were also reported in the All Other Compensation column in the Summary Compensation Table.
Column (d)
This column reports earnings or losses on both compensation the named executive officers elected to defer and earnings on employer contributions under the SBP. See the notes to column (h) of the Summary Compensation Table for a discussion of amounts of nonqualified deferred compensation earnings included in the Summary Compensation Table.
Column (f)
This column includes amounts that were deferred under the DCP and contributions under the SBP in prior years and reported in Gulf Power’s prior years’ Information Statements or Annual Reports on Form 10-K. The chart below shows the amounts reported in Gulf Power’s prior years’ Information Statements or Annual Reports on Form 10-K.
            
                  
 Amounts Deferred under     Amounts Deferred under    
 the DCP Prior to 2008 Employer Contributions   the DCP Prior to 2009 Employer Contributions  
 and Reported in Prior under the SBP Prior to   and Reported in Prior under the SBP Prior to  
 Years’ Information 2008 and Reported in Prior Years’   Years’ Information 2009 and Reported in Prior Years’  
 Statements or Annual Information Statements or   Statements or Annual Information Statements or  
 Reports on Form 10-K Annual Reports on Form 10-K Total Reports on Form 10-K Annual Reports on Form 10-K Total
Name ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($)
S. N. Story 18,373 258,601 276,974  18,373 266,792 285,165 
R. R. Labrato 47,951 313 48,264 
P. C. Raymond 0 0 0  0 0 0 
P. B. Jacob 27,927 22,674 50,601  43,870 22,674 66,544 
T. J. McCullough 9,516 0 9,516  18,653 0 18,653 
B. C. Terry 59,383 0 59,383  121,427 0 121,427 
POTENTIAL PAYMENTS UPON TERMINATION OR CHANGE-IN-CONTROLCHANGE IN CONTROL
This section describes and estimates payments that could be made to the named executive officers under different termination and change-in-control events. The estimated payments would be made under the terms of Southern Company’s compensation and benefits programs or the change-in-control severance program. All of the named executive officers are participants in Southern Company’s change-in-control severance plan for officers. (As described in the CD&A, all employees not part of a collective bargaining unit are participants in a change-in-control severance plan.) The amount of potential payments is calculated as if the triggering events occurred as of December 31, 20082009 and assumes that the price of Common Stock is the closing market price on December 31, 2008.2009.
Description of Termination and Change-in-Control Events
The following charts list different types of termination and change-in-control events that can affect the treatment of payments under the compensation and benefit programs. These events also affect payments to the named executive officers under their change-in-control severance agreements. No payments are made under the severance

III-31


agreements unless, within two years of the change-in-control,change in control, the named executive officer is involuntarily terminated or he or she voluntarily terminates for Good Reason. (See the description of Good Reason below.)
Traditional Termination Events
 Retirement or Retirement Eligible – Termination of a named executive officer who is at least 50 years old and has at least 10 years of credited service.
 
 Resignation – Voluntary termination of a named executive officer who is not retirement eligible.retirement-eligible.
 
 Lay Off – Involuntary termination of a named executive officer not for cause, who is not retirement eligible.retirement-eligible.

III-30


 Involuntary Termination – Involuntary termination of a named executive officer for cause. Cause includes individual performance below minimum performance standards and misconduct, such as violation of Gulf Power’s Drug and Alcohol Policy.
 
 Death or Disability – Termination of a named executive officer due to death or disability.
Change-in-Control-Related Events
At the Southern Company or Gulf Power level:
 Southern Company Change-in-Control I – Acquisition by another entity of 20% or more of Common Stock, or following a merger with another entity Southern Company’s stockholders own 65% or less of the entity surviving the merger.
 
 Southern Company Change-in-Control II – Acquisition by another entity of 35% or more of Common Stock, or following a merger with another entity Gulf Power’s stockholders own less than 50% of Gulf Power surviving the merger.
 
 Southern Company Termination – A merger or other event and Southern Company is not the surviving company or the Common Stock is no longer publicly traded.
 
 Gulf Power Change-in-ControlChange in Control – Acquisition by another entity, other than another subsidiary of Southern Company, of 50% or more of the stock of Gulf Power, a merger with another entity and Gulf Power is not the surviving company, or the sale of substantially all the assets of Gulf Power.
At the employee level:
Involuntary Change-in-Control Termination or Voluntary Change-in-Control Termination for Good Reason – Employment is terminated within two years of a change-in-control,change in control, other than for cause, or the employee voluntarily terminates for Good Reason. Good Reason for voluntary termination within two years of a change-in-controlchange in control generally is generally satisfied when there is a material reduction in salary, incentiveperformance-based compensation opportunity or benefits, relocation of over 50 miles, or a diminution in duties and responsibilities.

III-32III-31


The following chart describes the treatment of different pay and benefit elements in connection with the Traditional Termination Events described above.
           
    Lay Off      
  Retirement/ (Involuntary     Involuntary
  Retirement Termination     Termination
Program Eligible Not For Cause) Resignation Death or Disability (For Cause)
Pension Benefits
Plans
 Benefits payable as described in the notes following the Pension Benefits Table.table. Same as Retirement. Same as Retirement. Same as Retirement. Same as Retirement.
           
 
           
Annual IncentivePerformance
Pay Program
 Pro-rated if terminate before 12/31. Same as Retirement. Forfeit. Same as Retirement. Forfeit.
           
 
           
Performance
Dividend
Program
 Paid year of retirement plus two additional years. Forfeit. Forfeit. Payable until options expire or exercised. Forfeit.
           
 
           
Stock Options
 Vest; expire earlier of original expiration date or five years. Vested options expire in 90 days; unvested are forfeited. Same as Lay Off. Vest; expire earlier of original expiration or three years. Forfeit.
           
 
           
Financial Planning
Perquisite
 Continues for one year. Terminates. Terminates. Same as Retirement. Terminates.
           
 
           
Deferred
Compensation Plan
 Payable per prior elections (lump sum or up to 10 annual installments). Same as Retirement. Same as Retirement. Payable to beneficiary or disabled participant per prior elections; amounts deferred prior to 2005 can be paid as a lump sum per benefit administration committee’s discretion. Same as Retirement.
           
 
           
Supplemental
Benefit Plan –
non-pension related
 Payable per prior elections (lump sum or up to 20 annual installments). Same as Retirement. Same as Retirement. Same as the Deferred Compensation Plan. Same as Retirement.
 
 

III-33III-32


The chart below describes the treatment of payments under pay and benefit programs under different change-in-control events, except the Pension Plan. The Pension Plan is not affected by change-in-control events.
         
        Involuntary Change-
        in-Control-Related
        Termination or
      Southern Company Voluntary Change-
      Termination or Gulf in-Control-Related
  Southern Company Southern Company Power Change-in-Change in Termination for
Program Change-in-Control I Change-in-Control II Control Good Reason
Nonqualified
Pension Benefits
 All SERP-related benefits vest if participants vested in tax-qualified pension benefits; otherwise, no impact. SBP – pension related benefits vest for all participants and single sum value of benefits earned to change-in-control date paid following termination or retirement. Benefits vest for all participants and single sum value of benefits earned to the change-in-control date paid following termination or retirement. Same as Southern Company Change-in-Control II. Based on type of change-in-control event.
         
 
         
Annual IncentivePerformance
Pay Program
 No planprogram termination is paid at greater of target or actual performance. If planprogram terminated within two years of change-in-control,change in control, pro-rated at target performance level. Same as Southern Company Change-in-Control I. Pro-rated at target performance level. If not otherwise eligible for payment, if annual incentivethe program still in effect, pro-rated at target performance level.
         
 
         
Performance Dividend
Program
 No planprogram termination is paid at greater of target or actual performance. If planprogram terminated within two years of change-in-control,change in control, pro-rated at greater of target or actual performance level. Same as Southern Company Change-in-Control I. Pro-rated at greater of actual or target performance level. If not otherwise eligible for payment, if the performance dividend program is still in effect, greater of actual or target performance level for year of severance only.
         
 
         
Stock Options
 Not affected by change-in-control events. Not affected by change-in-control events. Vest and convert to surviving company’s securities; if cannot convert, pay spread in cash. Vest.
         
 
         
DCP
 Not affected by change-in-control events. Not affected by change-in-control events. Not affected by change-in-control events. Not affected by change-in-control events.
 
SBP
Not affected by change-in-control events.Not affected by change-in-control events.Not affected by change-in-control events.Not affected by change-in-control events.
 

III-34III-33


         
        Involuntary Change-
        in-Control-Related
        Termination or
      Southern Company Voluntary Change-
      Termination or Gulf in-Control-Related
  Southern Company Southern Company Power Change-in-Change in Termination for
Program Change-in-Control I Change-in-Control II Control Good Reason
SBP
Not affected by change-in-control events.Not affected by change-in-control events.Not affected by change-in-control events.Not affected by change-in-control events.
Severance Benefits
 Not applicable. Not applicable. Not applicable. TwoOne or three times base salary plus target annual incentiveperformance-based compensation plus tax gross up for certain namedthe president and chief executive officersofficer if athe severance amount exceeds the Code Section 280G - “excess parachute payment” by 10% or more.
 
Health Benefits
 Not applicable. Not applicable. Not applicable. Up to five years participation in group health plan plus payment of two or three years’ premium amounts.
 
Outplacement
Services
 Not applicable. Not applicable. Not applicable. Six months.
 
Potential Payments
This section describes and estimates payments that would become payable to the named executive officers upon a termination or change-in-controlchange in control as of December 31, 2008.2009.
Pension Benefits
The amounts that would have become payable to the named executive officers if the Traditional Termination Events occurred as of December 31, 20082009 under the Pension Plan, the SBP-P, and the SERP are itemized in the chart below. The amounts shown under the column Retirement are amounts that would have become payable to the named executive officers that were retirement eligibleretirement-eligible on December 31, 20082009 and are the monthly Pension Plan benefits and the first of 10 annual installments from the SBP-P and the SERP. The amounts shown under the column Resignation or Involuntary Termination are the amounts that would have become payable to the named executive officers who were not retirement eligibleretirement-eligible on December 31, 20082009 and are the monthly Pension Plan benefits that would become payable as of the earliest possible date under the Pension Plan and the single sum value of benefits earned up to the termination date under the SBP-P, paid as a single payment rather than in 10 annual installments. Benefits under the SERP would be forfeited. The amounts shown that are payable to a spouse in the event of the death of the named executive officer are the monthly amounts payable to a spouse under the Pension Plan and the first of 10 annual installments from the SBP-P and the SERP. The amounts in this chart are very different from the pension values shown in the Summary Compensation Table and the Pension Benefits Table.table. Those tables show the

III-34


present values of all the benefits amounts anticipated to be paid over the lifetimes of the named executive officers and their spouses. Those plans are described in the notes following the Pension Benefits Table.table. Of the named executive officers, only Messrs. LabratoJacob and JacobRaymond were retirement eligible on December 31, 2008.2009.

III-35


                            
 Resignation or   Resignation or  
 Involuntary Death Involuntary Death
 Retirement Termination (payments to a spouse) Retirement Termination (payments to a spouse)
Name ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($)
S. N. Story Pension  n/a   2,185   3,588  Pension  n/a   2,345  3,852 
 SBP-P     823,105   102,196  SBP-P     978,397  110,175 
 SERP     0   41,388  SERP     0  45,345 
R. R. Labrato Pension  5,751  All plans treated as  3,845 
P. C. Raymond Pension  2,345  All plans treated as  2,279 
 SBP-P  41,035  retiring  41,035  SBP-P  11,507  retiring  11,507 
 SERP  27,228      27,228  SERP  12,401      12,401 
P.C. Raymond Pension  n/a  1,198  1,968 
 SBP-P    83,802  10,324 
 SERP        9,043 
P.B. Jacob Pension  4,500   All plans treated as   3,256 
P. B. Jacob Pension  5,162  All plans treated as  3,531 
 SBP-P  26,605   retiring   26,605  SBP-P  27,010  retiring  27,010 
 SERP  20,165      20,165  SERP  22,069      22,069 
T. J. McCullough Pension  n/a   1,331   2,185  Pension  n/a   1,448  2,379 
 SBP-P     47,421   6,962  SBP-P     68,550  8,967 
 SERP     0   9,026  SERP     0  10,265 
B C. Terry Pension  n/a   493   809  Pension  n/a   619  1,016 
 SBP-P     18,299   3,680  SBP-P     23,643  4,098 
 SERP     0   4,275  SERP     0  5,863 
As described in the Change-in-Control Chart, the only change in the form of payment, acceleration, or enhancement of the pension benefits is that the single sum value of benefits earned up to the change-in-control date under the SBP-P and the SERP could be paid as a single payment rather than in 10 annual installments. Also, the SERP benefits vest for participants who are not retirement eligibleretirement-eligible upon a change-in-control.change in control. Estimates of the single sum payment that would have been made to the named executive officers, assuming termination as of December 31, 20082009 following a change-in-control event, other than a Southern Company Change-in-Control I (which does not impact how pension benefits are paid), are itemized below. These amounts would be paid instead of the benefits shown in the Traditional Termination Events chart above; they are not paid in addition to those amounts.
                        
 SBP-P SERP Total SBP-P SERP Total
Name ($) ($) ($) ($) ($) ($)
S. N. Story 800,944 324,370 1,125,314  954,821 392,976 1,347,797 
R. R. Labrato 410,353 272,279 682,632 
P. C. Raymond 81,546 71,427 152,973  115,068 124,010 239,078 
P. B. Jacob 266,054 201,654 467,708  270,098 220,694 490,792 
T. J. McCullough 46,144 59,820 105,964  66,899 76,594 143,493 
B. C. Terry 17,807 20,686 38,493  23,073 33,009 56,082 
The pension benefit amounts in the tables above were calculated as of December 31, 20082009 assuming payments would begin as soon as possible under the terms of the plans. Accordingly, appropriate early retirement reductions were applied. Any unpaid incentives wereannual performance-based compensation was assumed to be paid at 1.351.30 times the target level. Pension Plan benefits were calculated assuming each named executive officer chose a single life annuity form of payment, because that results in the greatest monthly benefit. The single sum values of the SBP-P and the SERP benefits were based on a 4.75%4.25% discount rate as prescribed by the terms of the plan.
Annual Performance Pay Program
The amount payable if a change in control had occurred on December 31, 2009 is the greater of target or actual performance. Because actual payouts for 2009 performance were below the target level, the amount that would have been payable was the target level amount as reported in the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table.

III-36III-35


Annual Incentive
Because this section assumes that a termination or change-in-control event occurred on December 31, 2008, there is no amount that would be payable other than what was reported and described in the Summary Compensation Table because actual performance in 2008 exceeded target performance.
Performance Dividends
Because the assumed termination date is December 31, 2008,2009, there is no additional amount that would be payable other than what was reported in the Summary Compensation Table. As described in the Traditional Termination Events chart, there is some continuation of benefits under the performance dividend programPerformance Dividend Program for retirees.
However, under the Change-in-Control-Related Events, performance dividends are payable at the greater of target performance or actual performance. For the 2005-20082006-2009 performance-measurement period, actual performance was better than targetexceeded target-level performance.
Stock Options
Stock Options would be treated as described in the Termination and Change-in-Control charts above. Under a Southern Company Termination, all stock options vest. In addition, if there is an Involuntary Change-in-Control Termination or Voluntary Change-in-Control Termination for Good Reason, stock options vest. There is no payment associated with stock options unless there is a Southern Company Termination and the participants’ stock options cannot be converted into surviving company stock options. In that event, the excess of the exercise price and the closing price of the Common Stock on December 31, 20082009 would be paid in cash for all stock options held by the named executive officers. The chart below shows the number of stock options for which vesting would be accelerated under a Southern Company Termination and the amount that would be payable under a Southern Company Termination if there were no conversion to the surviving company’s stock options.
                      
   Total Payable in   Total Payable in
 Total Number of Cash under a Total Number of Cash under a
  Options Following Southern Company   Options Following Southern Company
 Number of Options Accelerated Vesting Termination without Number of Options Accelerated Vesting Termination without
 with Accelerated under a Southern Conversion of Stock with Accelerated under a Southern Conversion of Stock
 Vesting Company Termination Options Vesting Company Termination Options
Name (#) (#) ($) (#) (#) ($)
S. N. Story 86,163 166,736 375,683  143,651 266,959 217,318 
R. R. Labrato 31,336 77,568 260,157 
P. C. Raymond 18,117 42,015 127,924  36,818 69,759 82,010 
P. B. Jacob 27,481 41,273 73,419  41,809 69,250 56,934 
T. J. McCullough 14,107 32,203 112,241  22,479 47,018 63,291 
B. C. Terry 22,130 31,190 49,600  39,478 58,934 53,546 

III-37


DCP and SBP
The aggregate balances reported in the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Tabletable would be payable to the named executive officers as described in the Traditional Termination and Change-in-Control-Related Events charts above. There is no enhancement or acceleration of payments under these plans associated with termination or change-in-control events, other than the lump-sum payment opportunity described in the above charts. The lump sums that would be payable are those that are reported in the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Table.table.
Health Benefits
Messrs. LabratoJacob and JacobRaymond are retirement eligibleretirement-eligible and health care benefits are provided to retirees, and there is no incremental payment associated with the termination or change-in-control events. At the end of 2008,2009, Mss. Story and Terry and Messrs.Mr. McCullough and Raymond were not retirement eligibleretirement-eligible and thus health care benefits would not become available until each reaches age 50, except in the case of a change-in-control-related termination, as described in the Change-in-Control-Related Events chart. The estimated cost of providing three years of group health insurance premiums for Ms. Story is $13,998 and$14,000, two years for Ms. Terry is $8,925$9,000, and $20,227 eachtwo years for Messrs.Mr. McCullough and Raymond.is $20,000.

III-36


Financial Planning Perquisite
Since Messrs. LabratoJacob and JacobRaymond are retirement eligible,retirement-eligible, an additional year of the Financial Planning perquisite, which is set at a maximum of $8,700 per year, will be provided after retirement. Mss. Story and Terry and Messrs.Mr. McCullough and Raymond are not retirement eligible.retirement-eligible.
There are no other perquisites provided to the named executive officers under any of the traditional termination or change-in-control-related events.
Severance Benefits
The named executive officers are participants in a change-in-control severance plan. In addition to the treatment of health benefits, the annual incentive program,Performance Pay Program, and the performance dividend programPerformance Dividend Program described above, the named executive officers are entitled to a severance benefit, including outplacement services, if within two years of a change-in-control,change in control, they anare involuntarily terminated, not for Cause, or they voluntarily terminate for Good Reason. The severance benefits are not paid unless the named executive officer releases the employing company from any claims he or she may have against the employing company.
The estimated cost of providing the six months of outplacement services is $6,000 per named executive officer. The severance payment is three times the base salary and target payout under the annual incentive programPerformance Pay Program for Ms. Story and twoone times the base salary and target payout under the annual incentive programPerformance Pay Program for the other named executive officers. IfFor Ms. Story, if any portion of the severance payment is an “excess parachute payment” as defined under Section 280G of the Code, the employing companyGulf Power will pay the named executive officerher an additional amount to cover the taxes that would be due on the excess parachute payment — a “tax gross-up.” However, that additional amount will not be paid unless the severance amount plus all other amounts that are considered parachute payments under the Code exceed 110% of the severance payment.

III-38


The table below estimates the severance payments that would be made to the named executive officers if they were terminated as of December 31, 20082009 in connection with a change-in-control.change in control. There is no estimated tax gross-up included for any of the named executive officersMs. Story because their respectiveher estimated severance amountsamount payable areis below the amountsamount considered excess parachute payments under the Code. None of the other named executive officer is eligible for a tax gross-up.
     
Name Severance Amount ($)
S. N. Story  1,901,203
R. R. Labrato761,2501,901,202 
P. C. Raymond  662,456331,228 
P. B. Jacob  668,003334,002 
T. J. McCullough  512,324256,162 
B. C. Terry  662,456331,228 
COMPENSATION RISK ASSESSMENT
Southern Company reviewed its compensation policies and practices, including those of Gulf Power, and concluded that excessive risk-taking is not encouraged. This conclusion was based on an assessment of the mix of pay components and performance goals, the annual pay/performance analysis by the Compensation Committee’s consultant, stock ownership requirements, our compensation governance practices, and our “claw-back” provision.
The assessment was reviewed with the Compensation Committee.

III-37


DIRECTOR COMPENSATION
Only non-employee directors of Gulf Power are compensated for service on the board of directors. The pay components for non-employee directors are:
     Annual retainers:
$12,000 annual retainer
     Equity grants:
340 shares of Common Stock in quarterly grants of 85 shares
     Meeting fees:
  $1,200 for participation in a meeting of the board
 
  $1,000 for participation in a meeting of a committee of the board
DIRECTOR DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN
Any deferred quarterly equity grants are required to be deferred in the Deferred Compensation Plan For Directors of Gulf Power Company (Director Deferred Compensation Plan) and are invested in Common Stock units which earn dividends as if invested in Common Stock. Earnings are reinvested in additional stock units. Upon leaving the board, distributions are made in shares of Common Stock.
In addition, directors may elect to defer up to 100% of their remaining compensation in the Director Deferred Compensation Plan until membership on the board ends. Deferred compensation may be invested as follows, at the director’s election:
 in Common Stock units which earn dividends as if invested in Common Stock and are distributed in shares of Common Stock upon leaving the board
 
 in Common Stock units which earn dividends as if invested in Common Stock and are distributed in cash upon leaving the board
 
 at prime interest which is paid in cash upon leaving the board
All investments and earnings in the Director Deferred Compensation Plan are fully vested and, at the election of the director, may be distributed in a lump sum payment or in up to 10 annual distributions after leaving the board.

III-39III-38


DIRECTOR COMPENSATION TABLE
The following table reports all compensation to Gulf Power’s non-employee directors during 2008,2009, including amounts deferred in the Director Deferred Compensation Plan. Non-employee directors do not receive Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation, and there is no pension plan for non-employee directors.
                                        
 Change in     Change in    
 Pension     Pension    
 Value and     Value and    
 Nonqualified     Nonqualified    
  Deferred       Deferred    
 Fees Earned or Paid Stock Compensation All Other   Fees Earned or Paid Stock Compensation All Other  
 in Cash Awards Earnings Compensation Total in Cash Awards Earnings Compensation Total
Name ($)(1) ($)(2) ($)(3) ($)(4) ($) ($)(1) ($)(2) ($)(3) ($)(4) ($)
C. LeDon Anchors
 17,800 18,536 0 123 36,459  16,800 17,127 0 54 33,981 
William C. Cramer, Jr.
 0 36,336 0 421 36,757  0 33,927 0 54 33,981 
Fred C. Donovan, Sr.
 0 36,336 0 123 36,459  0 33,927 0 54 33,981 
William A. Pullum
 0 36,336 0 123 36,459  0 33,927 0 54 33,981 
Winston E. Scott
 36,294 0 0 123 36,417  33,858 0 0 3,866 37,724 
 
(1) Includes amounts voluntarily deferred in the Director Deferred Compensation Plan.
 
(2) Includes fair market value of equity grants on grant dates. All such stock awards are vested immediately upon grant.
 
(3) Above-market earnings on amounts invested in the Director Deferred Compensation Plan. Above-market earnings are defined by the SEC as any amount above 120% of the applicable federal long-term rate as prescribed under Section 1274(d) of the Code.
 
(4) Consists of reimbursement for taxes on imputed income associated with gifts.
COMPENSATION COMMITTEE INTERLOCKS AND INSIDER PARTICIPATION
The Compensation Committee is made up of non-employee directors of Southern Company who have never served as executive officers of Southern Company or Gulf Power. During 2008,2009, none of Southern Company’s or Gulf Power’s executive officers served on the board of directors of any entities whose directors or officers serve on the Compensation Committee.

III-40III-39


ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
ITEM 12.SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners.Southern Company is the beneficial owner of 100% of the outstanding common stock of Gulf Power.
           
    Amount and  
  Name and Address Nature of Percent
  of Beneficial Beneficial of
Title of Class Owner Ownership Class
Common Stock The Southern Company        
  30 Ivan Allen Jr. Boulevard, N.W.        
  Atlanta, Georgia 30308      100%
  
Registrant:
        
  Gulf Power  3,142,7173,642,717     
Security Ownership of Management.The following tables show the number of shares of Common Stock owned by the directors, nominees, and executive officers as of December 31, 2008.2009. It is based on information furnished by the directors, nominees, and executive officers. The shares owned by all directors, nominees, and executive officers as a group constitute less than one percent of the total number of shares outstanding on December 31, 2008.2009.
                       
 Shares Beneficially Owned Include:  Shares Beneficially Owned Include: 
 Shares  Shares 
 Individuals  Individuals 
 Have Rights  Have Rights 
Name of Directors, Shares to Acquire  Shares to Acquire 
Nominees, and Beneficially Deferred Stock Within 60  Beneficially Deferred Stock Within 60 
Executive Officers Owned (1) Units (2) Days (3)  Owned (1) Units (2) Days (3) 
Susan N. Story 129,225 0 42,735  191,938 0 185,675 
C. LeDon Anchors 6,365 4,912 0  7,492 5,751 0 
William C. Cramer, Jr. 7,566 7,566 0  9,115 9,115 0 
Fred C. Donovan, Sr. 4,943 4,943 0  6,338 6,338 0 
William A. Pullum 8,835 8,835 0  10,458 10,458 0 
Winston E. Scott 611 0 0  1,407 0 0 
P. Bernard Jacob 33,061 0 13,649  52,275 0 46,004 
Theodore J. McCullough 24,764 0 6,443  34,887 0 34,218 
Philip C. Raymond 35,155 0 9,043  50,615 0 48,270 
Bentina C. Terry 19,837 0 10,396  37,458 0 36,162 
 
Directors, Nominees, and Executive Officers as a group (10 people) 270,362 26,256 82,266  401,983 31,662 350,329 
 
 
(1) “Beneficial ownership” means the sole or shared power to vote, or to direct the voting of, a security and/or investment power with respect to a security or any combination thereof.
 
(2) Indicates the number of deferred stock units held under the Director Deferred Compensation Plan.
 
(3) Indicates shares of Common Stock that certain executive officers have the right to acquire within 60 days. Shares indicated are included in the Shares Beneficially Owned column.
Changes in Control.Southern Company and Gulf Power know of no arrangements which may at a subsequent date result in any change-in-control.

III-41III-40


Equity Compensation Plan Information
The following table provides information as of December 31, 20082009 concerning shares of Common Stock authorized for issuance under Southern Company’s existing non-qualified equity compensation plans.
                        
 Number of securities Number of securities
 remaining available remaining available
 for future issuance for future issuance
 under equity under equity
 Number of securities Weighted-average compensation plans Number of securities Weighted-average compensation plans
 to be issued upon exercise price of (excluding to be issued upon exercise price of (excluding
 exercise of outstanding securities exercise of outstanding securities
 outstanding options, options, warrants, reflected in outstanding options, options, warrants, reflected in
 warrants, and rights and rights column (a)) warrants, and rights and rights column (a))
Plan category (a) (b) (c) (a) (b) (c)
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders 36,952,419 $32.09 34,843,588  48,247,319 $32.10 22,497,013 
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders N/A N/A N/A  N/A N/A N/A 
 
(1) Includes shares available for future issuances under the Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan, the 2006 Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan, and the Outside Directors Stock Plan.
 
(2) Includes shares available for future issuance under the 2006 Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan (33,222,128)(20,985,906) and the Outside Directors Stock Plan (1,621,460)(1,511,107).
ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE.
ITEM 13.CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE.
Transactions with Related Persons.
In 2008, Gulf Power paid $120,042 to Baskerville-Donovan, Inc. for architectural and design services. Mr. Donovan, a director of Gulf Power, is the chairman and chief executive officer of Baskerville-Donovan, Inc.None.
Review, Approval or Ratification of Transactions with Related Persons.
Gulf Power does not have a written policy pertaining solely to the approval or ratification of “related party transactions.” Southern Company has a Code of Ethics as well as a Contract Guidance Manual and other formal written procurement policies and procedures that guide the purchase of goods and services, including requiring competitive bids for most transactions above $10,000 or approval based on documented business needs for sole sourcing arrangements.

III-42III-41


Promoters and Certain Control Persons.
None.
Director Independence.
The board of directors of Gulf Power consists of five non-employee directors (Messrs. C. LeDon Anchors, William C. Cramer, Jr., Fred C. Donovan, Sr., William A. Pullum, and Winston E. Scott) and Ms. Story, the president and chief executive officer of Gulf Power.
Southern Company owns all of Gulf Power’s outstanding common stock, which represents a substantial majority of the overall voting power of Gulf Power’s equity securities, andstock. Gulf Power has listed only debt securities on the NYSE. Accordingly, under the rules of the NYSE, Gulf Power is exempt from most of the NYSE’s listing standards relating to corporate governance, including requirements relating to certain board committees. Gulf Power has voluntarily complied with certain of the NYSE’s listing standards relating to corporate governance where such compliance was deemed to be in the best interests of Gulf Power’s shareholders.
ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
The following represents the fees billed to Gulf Power and Southern Power for the last two fiscal years by Deloitte & Touche LLP, each company’s principal public accountant for 20082009 and 2007:2008:
                
 2008 2007  2009 2008 
 (in thousands)  (in thousands) 
Gulf Power
  
Audit Fees (1) $1,324 $1,113  $1,308 $1,324 
Audit-Related Fees (2) 0 27 
Audit-Related Fees 0 0 
Tax Fees 0 0  0 0 
All Other Fees 0 0  0 0 
          
Total $1,324 $1,140  $1,308 $1,324 
          
Southern Power
  
Audit Fees (1) $943 $1,016  $1,136 $943 
Audit-Related Fees (2) 0 64  38 0 
Tax Fees 0 0  0 0 
All Other Fees 0 0  0 0 
          
Total $943 $1,080  $1,174 $943 
          
 
(1) Includes services performed in connection with financing transactions.
 
(2) Includes other non-statutory audit services and accounting consultations.
The Southern Company Audit Committee (on behalf of Southern Company and its subsidiaries) adopted a Policy of Engagement of the Independent Auditor for Audit and Non-Audit Services that includes requirements for such Audit Committee to pre-approve audit and
non-audit services provided by Deloitte & Touche LLP. All of the audit services provided by Deloitte & Touche LLP in fiscal years 20082009 and 20072008 (described in the footnotes to the table above) and related fees were approved in advance by the Southern Company Audit Committee.

III-43III-42


PART IV
Item 15. EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
 (a) The following documents are filed as a part of this report on Form 10-K:
 (1) Financial Statements:
 
   Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting for Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies is listed under Item 8 herein.
 
   Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting for Alabama Power is listed under Item 8 herein.
 
   Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting for Georgia Power is listed under Item 8 herein.
 
   Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting for Gulf Power is listed under Item 8 herein.
 
   Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting for Mississippi Power is listed under Item 8 herein.
 
   Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting for Southern Power and Subsidiary Companies is listed under Item 8 herein.
 
   Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on the financial statements for Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, and Southern Power and Subsidiary Companies are listed under Item 8 herein.
 
   The financial statements filed as a part of this report for Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, and Southern Power and Subsidiary Companies are listed under Item 8 herein.
 (2) Financial Statement Schedules:
   Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm as to Schedules for Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power are included herein on pages IV-8, IV-9, IV-10, IV-11, and IV-12.
 
   Financial Statement Schedules for Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power are listed in the Index to the Financial Statement Schedules at page S-1.
 (3) Exhibits:
   Exhibits for Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, and Southern Power are listed in the Exhibit Index at page E-1.

IV-1


THE SOUTHERN COMPANY
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) 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. The signature of the undersigned company shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to such company and any subsidiaries thereof.
     
  THE SOUTHERN COMPANY
     
  By: David M. Ratcliffe
    Chairman, President, and
    Chief Executive Officer
     
  By: /s/ Wayne BostonMelissa K. Caen
     
    (Wayne Boston,Melissa K. Caen, Attorney-in-fact)
     
  Date: February 25, 20092010
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated. The signature of each of the undersigned shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to the above-named company and any subsidiaries thereof.
David M. Ratcliffe
Chairman, President,
Chief Executive Officer, and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
W. Paul Bowers
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
W. Ron Hinson
Comptroller and Chief Accounting Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer)
       
  David M. Ratcliffe
Chairman, President,
Chief Executive Officer, and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
W. Paul Bowers
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
W. Ron Hinson
Comptroller and Chief Accounting Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer)
  Directors:
  
  Juanita Powell Baranco Warren A. Hood, Jr.
  Francis S. BlakeJon A. Boscia Donald M. James
  Jon A. BosciaThomas F. Chapman J. Neal Purcell
  Thomas F. ChapmanHenry A. Clark III William G. Smith, Jr.
  H. William Habermeyer, Jr. Gerald J. St. Pé
  Veronica M. Hagen  
       
  By: /s/ Wayne BostonMelissa K. Caen
       
    (Wayne Boston,Melissa K. Caen, Attorney-in-fact)
       
  Date:February 25, 20092010

IV-2


ALABAMA POWER COMPANY
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) 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. The signature of the undersigned company shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to such company and any subsidiaries thereof.
     
  ALABAMA POWER COMPANY
     
  By: Charles D. McCrary
    President and Chief Executive Officer
  
  
  By: /s/ Wayne BostonMelissa K. Caen
     
    (Wayne Boston,Melissa K. Caen, Attorney-in-fact)
     
  Date: February 25, 20092010
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated. The signature of each of the undersigned shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to the above-named company and any subsidiaries thereof.
Charles D. McCrary
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
Art P. Beattie
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer
(Principal Financial Officer)
Moses H. Feagin
Vice President and Comptroller
(Principal Accounting Officer)
       
  Charles D. McCrary
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
Art P. Beattie
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer
(Principal Financial Officer)
Moses H. Feagin
Vice President and Comptroller
(Principal Accounting Officer)
  Directors:
  
  Whit Armstrong Malcolm PorteraRobert D. Powers
  Ralph D. Cook Robert D. PowersDavid M. Ratcliffe
  David J. Cooper, Sr. David M. RatcliffeC. Dowd Ritter
  John D. Johns C. Dowd RitterJames H. Sanford
  Patricia M. King James H. SanfordJohn Cox Webb, IV
  James K. Lowder James W. Wright
  John Cox Webb, IVMalcolm Portera
       
  By: /s/ Wayne BostonMelissa K. Caen
       
    (Wayne Boston,Melissa K. Caen, Attorney-in-fact)
       
  Date:February 25, 20092010

IV-3


GEORGIA POWER COMPANY
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) 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. The signature of the undersigned company shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to such company and any subsidiaries thereof.
     
  GEORGIA POWER COMPANY
     
  By: Michael D. Garrett
    President and Chief Executive Officer
     
  By: /s/ Wayne BostonMelissa K. Caen
     
    (Wayne Boston,Melissa K. Caen, Attorney-in-fact)
     
  Date: February 25, 20092010
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated. The signature of each of the undersigned shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to the above-named company and any subsidiaries thereof.
Michael D. Garrett
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
Cliff S. Thrasher
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer,
and Treasurer
(Principal Financial Officer)
Ann P. Daiss
Vice President, Comptroller, and Chief Accounting Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer)
       
  Michael D. Garrett
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
Ronnie R. Labrato
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer,
and Treasurer
(Principal Financial Officer)
Ann P. Daiss
Vice President, Comptroller, and Chief Accounting Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer)
  Directors:
  
  Robert L. Brown, Jr. Beverly D. Tatum
Anna R. Cablik D. Gary Thompson
  Anna R. CablikStephen S. Green Richard W. Ussery
  Stephen S. GreenDavid M. Ratcliffe W. Jerry Vereen
  Jimmy C. Tallent E. Jenner Wood, III
Beverly D. Tatum
       
  By: /s/ Wayne BostonMelissa K. Caen
 
    (Wayne Boston,Melissa K. Caen, Attorney-in-fact)
       
  Date:February 25, 20092010

IV-4


GULF POWER COMPANY
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) 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. The signature of the undersigned company shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to such company and any subsidiaries thereof.
     
  GULF POWER COMPANY
     
  By: Susan N. Story
    President and Chief Executive Officer
     
  By: /s/ Wayne BostonMelissa K. Caen
     
    (Wayne Boston,Melissa K. Caen, Attorney-in-fact)
     
  Date: February 25, 20092010
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated. The signature of each of the undersigned shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to the above-named company and any subsidiaries thereof.
Susan N. Story
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
Philip C. Raymond
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
Constance J. Erickson
Comptroller
(Principal Accounting Officer)
       
  Susan N. Story
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
Philip C. Raymond
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
Constance J. Erickson
Comptroller
(Principal Accounting Officer)
  Directors:
  
  C. LeDon Anchors William A. Pullum
  William C. Cramer, Jr. Winston E. Scott
  Fred C. Donovan, Sr.  
       
  By: /s/ Wayne BostonMelissa K. Caen
       
    (Wayne Boston,Melissa K. Caen, Attorney-in-fact)
       
  Date: February 25, 20092010

IV-5


MISSISSIPPI POWER COMPANY
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) 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. The signature of the undersigned company shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to such company and any subsidiaries thereof.
     
  MISSISSIPPI POWER COMPANY
     
  By: Anthony J. Topazi
    President and Chief Executive Officer
     
  By: /s/ Wayne BostonMelissa K. Caen
     
    (Wayne Boston,Melissa K. Caen, Attorney-in-fact)
     
  Date: February 25, 20092010
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated. The signature of each of the undersigned shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to the above-named company and any subsidiaries thereof.
Anthony J. Topazi
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
Frances Turnage
Vice President, Treasurer, and
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
Cindy F. Shaw
Comptroller
(Principal Accounting Officer)
       
  Anthony J. Topazi
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
Frances Turnage
Vice President, Treasurer, and
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
Cindy F. Shaw
Comptroller
(Principal Accounting Officer)
  Directors:
  
  Roy Anderson, III Martha D. SaundersChristine L. Pickering
  Tommy E. DulaneyCarl J. ChaneyGeorge A. Schloegel
Aubrey B. Patterson, Jr. Philip J. Terrell
Christine L. Pickering
       
  By: /s/ Wayne BostonMelissa K. Caen
       
    (Wayne Boston,Melissa K. Caen, Attorney-in-fact)
       
  Date:February 25, 20092010

IV-6


SOUTHERN POWER COMPANY
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) 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. The signature of the undersigned company shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to such company and any subsidiaries thereof.
     
  SOUTHERN POWER COMPANY
     
  By: Ronnie L. Bates
    President and Chief Executive Officer
     
  By: /s/ Wayne BostonMelissa K. Caen
     
    (Wayne Boston,Melissa K. Caen, Attorney-in-fact)
     
  Date: February 25, 20092010
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated. The signature of each of the undersigned shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to the above-named company and any subsidiaries thereof.
Ronnie L. Bates
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
Michael W. Southern
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
Laura I. Patterson
Comptroller
(Principal Accounting Officer)
      
  Ronnie L. Bates
 Directors:President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
Michael W. Southern
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
Laura I. Patterson
Comptroller
(Principal Accounting Officer)
Directors:
 W. Paul Bowers G. Edison Holland Jr.
 Thomas A. Fanning David M. Ratcliffe
       
  By: /s/ Wayne BostonMelissa K. Caen
       
    (Wayne Boston,Melissa K. Caen, Attorney-in-fact)
       
  Date:February 25, 20092010

IV-7


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Southern Company
We have audited the consolidated financial statements of Southern Company and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008,2009, and the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008,2009, and have issued our report thereon dated February 25, 2009;2010; such report is included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. Our audits also included the consolidated financial statement schedule of the Company (page S-2) listed in the accompanying index at Item 15. This consolidated financial statement schedule is the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits. In our opinion, such consolidated financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
February 25, 20092010
   
  Member of
  Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu

IV-8


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Alabama Power Company
We have audited the financial statements of Alabama Power Company (the “Company”) as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008,2009, and have issued our report thereon dated February 25, 2009;2010; such report is included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of the Company (page S-3) listed in the accompanying index at Item 15. This financial statement schedule is the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits. In our opinion, such financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Birmingham, Alabama
February 25, 20092010
   
  Member of
  Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu

IV-9


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Georgia Power Company
We have audited the financial statements of Georgia Power Company (the “Company”) as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008,2009, and have issued our report thereon dated February 25, 2009;2010; such report is included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of the Company (page S-4) listed in the accompanying index at Item 15. This financial statement schedule is the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits. In our opinion, such financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
February 25, 20092010
   
  Member of
  Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu

IV-10


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Gulf Power Company
We have audited the financial statements of Gulf Power Company (the “Company”) as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008,2009, and have issued our report thereon dated February 25, 2009;2010; such report is included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of the Company (page S-5) listed in the accompanying index at Item 15. This financial statement schedule is the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits. In our opinion, such financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
February 25, 20092010
   
  Member of
  Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu

IV-11


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Mississippi Power Company
We have audited the financial statements of Mississippi Power Company (the “Company”) as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008,2009, and have issued our report thereon dated February 25, 2009;2010; such report is included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of the Company (page S-6) listed in the accompanying index at Item 15. This financial statement schedule is the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits. In our opinion, such financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
February 25, 20092010
Member of
Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu
Member of                            
Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu

IV-12


INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
     
Schedule II
 Page
Valuation and Qualifying Accounts and Reserves 2009, 2008, 2007, and 20062007    
  S-2
  S-3
  S-4
  S-5
  S-6
Schedules I through V not listed above are omitted as not applicable or not required. A Schedule II for Southern Power Company and Subsidiary Companies is not being provided because there were no reportable items for the three-year period ended December 31, 2008.2009. Columns omitted from schedules filed have been omitted because the information is not applicable or not required.

S-1


Schedule Of Valuation And Qualifying Accounts Disclosure
THE SOUTHERN COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES

SCHEDULE II — VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, AND 20062007

(Stated in Thousands of Dollars)
                         
  Balance Additions      
  at Beginning Charged to Charged to     Balance at End
Description of Period Income Other Accounts Deductions of Period
 
Provision for uncollectible accounts                    
2008 $22,142  $60,184  $  $56,000(a) $26,326 
2007  34,901   34,471      47,230(a)  22,142 
2006  37,510   49,226   1,230   53,065(a)  34,901 
Tax valuation allowance                    
2008 (b) $  $  $  $  $ 
2007 (b)               
2006  10,160   53,164         63,324 
                     
  Balance Additions      
  at Beginning Charged to Charged to     Balance at End
Description of Period Income Other Accounts Deductions of Period
 
Provision for uncollectible accounts                    
2009 $26,326  $58,722  $  $60,480(Note) $24,568 
2008  22,142   60,184      56,000(Note)  26,326 
2007  34,901   34,471      47,230(Note)  22,142 
 
(a)(Note) Represents write-off of accounts considered to be uncollectible, less recoveries of amounts previously written off.
(b)See Note 5 to the financial statements of Southern Company in Item 8 herein.

S-2


ALABAMA POWER COMPANY

SCHEDULE II — VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, AND 20062007

(Stated in Thousands of Dollars)
                                             
 Additions   Additions  
 Balance at Beginning Charged to Charged to Other Balance at End Balance at Beginning Charged to Charged to Other Balance at End
Description of Period Income Accounts Deductions of Period of Period Income Accounts Deductions of Period
Provision for uncollectible accounts  
2009 $8,882 $21,951 $ $21,282 (Note) $9,551 
2008 $7,988 $20,824 $ $19,930 (Note) $8,882  7,988 20,824    19,930 (Note) 8,882 
2007 7,091 16,678    15,781 (Note) 7,988  7,091 16,678    15,781 (Note) 7,988 
2006 7,560 14,130    14,599 (Note) 7,091 
 
Note:(Note)Represents write-off of accounts considered to be uncollectible, less recoveries of amounts previously written off.

S-3


GEORGIA POWER COMPANY

SCHEDULE II — VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, AND 20062007

(Stated in Thousands of Dollars)
                           
      Additions      
  Balance at Beginning Charged to Charged to Other     Balance at End
Description of Period Income Accounts Deductions of Period
 
Provision for uncollectible accounts                    
2008 $7,636  $31,219  $  $28,123(a) $10,732 
2007  10,030   20,336      22,730(a)  7,636 
2006  9,563   26,503      26,036(a)  10,030 
Tax valuation allowance                    
2008 (b) $  $  $  $  $ 
2007 (b)               
2006  10,160   53,164         63,324 
                     
      Additions      
  Balance at Beginning Charged to Charged to Other     Balance at End
Description of Period Income Accounts Deductions of Period
 
Provision for uncollectible accounts                    
2009 $10,732  $29,088  $  $29,964 (Note) $9,856 
2008  7,636   31,219       28,123 (Note)  10,732 
2007  10,030   20,336       22,730 (Note)  7,636 
 
(a)(Note) Represents write-off of accounts considered to be uncollectible, less recoveries of amounts previously written off.
(b)See Note 5 to the financial statements of Georgia Power in Item 8 herein.

S-4


GULF POWER COMPANY

SCHEDULE II — VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, AND 20062007

(Stated in Thousands of Dollars)
                                            
 Additions   Additions  
 Balance at Beginning Charged to Charged to Other Balance at End Balance at Beginning Charged to Charged to Other Balance at End
Description of Period Income Accounts Deductions of Period of Period Income Accounts Deductions of Period
Provision for uncollectible accounts  
2009 $2,188 $3,753 $ $4,028 (Note) $1,913 
2008 $1,711 $3,893 $ $3,416 (Note) $2,188  1,711 3,893    3,416 (Note) 2,188 
2007 1,279 3,315    2,883 (Note) 1,711  1,279 3,315    2,883 (Note) 1,711 
2006 1,134 2,612    2,467 (Note) 1,279 
 
Note:(Note) Represents write-off of accounts considered to be uncollectible, less recoveries of amounts previously written off.

S-5


MISSISSIPPI POWER COMPANY
SCHEDULE II — VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2009, 2008, 2007, AND 20062007

(Stated in Thousands of Dollars)
                    
                         Additions  
 Additions   Balance at Charged Charged to Balance at
 Balance at Beginning Charged to Charged to Other Balance at End Beginning to Other End
Description of Period Income Accounts Deductions of Period of Period Income Accounts Deductions of Period
Provision for uncollectible accounts  
2009 $1,039 $2,356 $ $2,455 (Note) $940 
2008 $924 $2,372 $ $2,257 (Note) $1,039  924 2,372    2,257 (Note) 1,039 
2007 855 1,896    1,827 (Note) 924  855 1,896    1,827 (Note) 924 
2006 2,321 1,071    2,537 (Note) 855 
 
Note:(Note) Represents write-off of accounts considered to be uncollectible, less recoveries of amounts previously written off.

S-6


EXHIBIT INDEX
     The following exhibits indicated bybelow with an asterisk (*) preceding the exhibit number are filed herewith. The balance of theremaining exhibits has heretoforehave previously been filed with the SEC as the exhibits and in the file numbers indicated and are incorporated herein by reference. The exhibits marked with a pound sign (#) are management contracts or compensatory plans or arrangements required to be identified as such by Item 15 of Form 10-K.
             
(3) Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws
             
  Southern Company
             
    (a)  1  - Composite Certificate of Incorporation of Southern Company, reflecting all amendments thereto through January 5, 1994. (Designated in Registration No. 33-3546 as Exhibit 4(a), in Certificate of Notification, File No. 70-7341, as Exhibit A, and in Certificate of Notification, File No. 70-8181, as Exhibit A.)
             
    (a)  2  - By-laws of Southern Company as amended effective February 17, 2003, and as presently in effect. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2003, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 3(a)1.)
             
  Alabama Power
             
    (b)  1  - Charter of Alabama Power and amendments thereto through April 25, 2008. (Designated in Registration Nos.
2-59634 as Exhibit 2(b), 2-60209 as Exhibit 2(c), 2-60484 as Exhibit 2(b), 2-70838 as Exhibit 4(a)-2, 2-85987 as Exhibit 4(a)-2, 33-25539 as Exhibit 4(a)-2, 33-43917 as Exhibit 4(a)-2, in Form 8-K dated February 5, 1992, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4(b)-3, in Form 8-K dated July 8, 1992, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4(b)-3, in Form 8-K dated October 27, 1993, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibits 4(a) and 4(b), in Form 8-K dated November 16, 1993, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4(a), in Certificate of Notification, File No. 70-8191, as Exhibit A, in Alabama Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1997, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 3(b)2, in Form 8-K dated August 10, 1998, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.4, in Alabama Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 3(b)2, in Alabama Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 3(b)2, in Form 8-K dated February 5, 2003, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.4, in Alabama Power’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2003, File No 1-3164, as Exhibit 3(b)1, in Form 8-K dated February 5, 2004, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.4, in Alabama Power’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 3(b)(1), in Form 8-K dated December 5, 2006, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated September 12, 2007, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.5, in Form 8-K dated October 17, 2007, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.5, and in Alabama Power’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 3(b)1.)
             
    (b)  2  - By-laws of Alabama Power as amended effective January 26, 2007, and as presently in effect. (Designated in Form 8-K dated January 26, 2007, File No 1-3164, as Exhibit 3(b)2.)
             
  Georgia Power
             
    (c)  1  - Charter of Georgia Power and amendments thereto through October 9, 2007. (Designated in Registration Nos.
2-63392 as Exhibit 2(a)-2, 2-78913 as Exhibits 4(a)-(2) and 4(a)-(3), 2-93039 as Exhibit 4(a)-(2), 2-96810 as Exhibit 4(a)-2, 33-141 as Exhibit 4(a)-(2), 33-1359 as Exhibit 4(a)(2), 33-5405 as Exhibit 4(b)(2), 33-14367 as Exhibits 4(b)-(2) and 4(b)-(3), 33-22504 as Exhibits 4(b)-(2), 4(b)-(3) and 4(b)-(4), in Georgia Power’s
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1991, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibits 4(a)(2) and 4(a)(3), in

E-1


             
            Registration No. 33-48895 as Exhibits 4(b)-(2) and 4(b)-(3), in Form 8-K dated December 10, 1992, File
No. 1-6468 as Exhibit 4(b), in Form 8-K dated June 17, 1993, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4(b), in Form 8-K dated October 20, 1993, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4(b), in Georgia Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1997, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 3(c)2, in Georgia Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 3(c)2, in Form 8-K dated June 27, 2006, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 3.1, and in Form 8-K dated October 3, 2007, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.5.)
             
    (c)  2  - By-laws of Georgia Power as amended effective August 17, 2005,May 20, 2009, and as presently in effect. (Designated in
Form 8-K dated August 17, 2005,May 20, 2009, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 3(c)2.)
             
  Gulf Power
             
    (d)  1  - Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of Gulf Power and amendments thereto through October 17, 2007. (Designated in Form 8-K dated October 27, 2005, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 3.1, in Form 8-K dated November 9, 2005, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 4.7, and in Form 8-K dated October 16, 2007, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 4.5.)
             
    (d)  2  - By-laws of Gulf Power as amended effective November 2, 2005, and as presently in effect. (Designated in Form 8-K dated November 2, 2005, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 3.2.)
             
  Mississippi Power
             
    (e)  1  - Articles of Incorporation of Mississippi Power, articles of merger of Mississippi Power Company (a Maine corporation) into Mississippi Power and articles of amendment to the articles of incorporation of Mississippi Power through April 2, 2004. (Designated in Registration No. 2-71540 as Exhibit 4(a)-1, in Form U5S for 1987, File No. 30-222-2, as Exhibit B-10, in Registration No. 33-49320 as Exhibit 4(b)-(1), in Form 8-K dated August 5, 1992, File No. 0-6849, as Exhibits 4(b)-2 and 4(b)-3, in Form 8-K dated August 4, 1993, File No. 0-6849, as Exhibit 4(b)-3, in Form 8-K dated August 18, 1993, File No. 0-6849, as Exhibit 4(b)-3, in Mississippi Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1997, File No. 0-6849, as Exhibit 3(e)2, in Mississippi Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000, File No. 0-6849, as Exhibit 3(e)2, and in Form 8-K dated March 3, 2004, File No. 0-6849, as Exhibit 4.6.)
             
    (e)  2  - By-laws of Mississippi Power as amended effective February 28, 2001, and as presently in effect. (Designated in Mississippi Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, File No. 0-6849, as Exhibit 3(e)2.)
             
  Southern Power
             
    (f)  1  - Certificate of Incorporation of Southern Power dated January 8, 2001. (Designated in Registration No. 333-98553 as Exhibit 3.1.)
             
    (f)  2  - By-laws of Southern Power effective January 8, 2001. (Designated in Registration No. 333-98553 as Exhibit 3.2.)

E-2


             
(4) Instruments Describing Rights of Security Holders, Including Indentures
             
  Southern Company
             
    (a)  1  - Senior Note Indenture dated as of February 1, 2002, among Southern Company, Southern Company Capital Funding, Inc. and The Bank of New York Mellon (as successor to JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (formerly known as The Chase Manhattan Bank)), as Trustee, and indentures supplemental thereto through November 16, 2005. (Designated in Form 8-K dated January 29, 2002, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibits 4.1 and 4.2, in Form 8-K dated January 30, 2002, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 4.2, and in Form 8-K dated November 8, 2005, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 4.2.)
             
    (a)  2  - Senior Note Indenture dated as of January 1, 2007, between Southern Company and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee, and indentures supplemental thereto through August 21, 2008.October 22, 2009. (Designated in Form 8-K dated January 11, 2006, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibits 4.1 and 4.2, in Form 8-K dated March 20, 2007, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 4.2, and in Form 8-K dated August 13, 2008, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated May 11, 2009, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 4.2, and in Form 8-K dated October 19, 2009, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 4.2.)
             
  Alabama Power
             
    (b)  1  - Subordinated Note Indenture dated as of January 1, 1997, between Alabama Power and The Bank of New York Mellon (as successor to JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (formerly known as The Chase Manhattan Bank)), as Trustee, and indentures supplemental thereto through October 2, 2002. (Designated in Form 8-K dated January 9, 1997, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibits 4.1 and 4.2, in Form 8-K dated February 18, 1999, File No. 3164, as Exhibit 4.2 and in Form 8-K dated September 26, 2002, File No. 3164, as Exhibits 4.9-A and 4.9-B.)
             
    (b)  2  - Senior Note Indenture dated as of December 1, 1997, between Alabama Power and The Bank of New York Mellon (as successor to JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (formerly known as The Chase Manhattan Bank)), as Trustee, and indentures supplemental thereto through November 14, 2008.March 6, 2009. (Designated in Form 8-K dated December 4, 1997, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibits 4.1 and 4.2, in Form 8-K dated February 20, 1998, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated April 17, 1998, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated August 11, 1998, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated September 8, 1998, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated September 16, 1998, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated October 7, 1998, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated October 28, 1998, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated November 12, 1998, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated May 19, 1999, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated August 13, 1999, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated September 21, 1999, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated May 11, 2000, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated August 22, 2001, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibits 4.2(a) and 4.2(b), in Form 8-K dated June 21, 2002, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2(a), in Form 8-K dated October 16, 2002, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2(a), in Form 8-K dated November 20, 2002, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2(a), in Form 8-K dated December 6, 2002, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated February 11, 2003, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibits 4.2(a) and 4.2(b), in Form 8-K dated March 12, 2003, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated April 15, 2003, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated May 1, 2003, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated November 14, 2003, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated February 10, 2004, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2 in Form 8-K dated April 7, 2004, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated August 19, 2004, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated November 9, 2004, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated March 8, 2005, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated January 11, 2006, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated January 13, 2006, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated February 1, 2006, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibits

E-3


             
            Form 8-K dated March 8, 2005, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated January 11, 2006, File No.
1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated January 13, 2006, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated February 1, 2006, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibits 4.2(a) and 4.2(b), in Form 8-K dated March 9, 2006, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated June 7, 2006, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated January 30, 2007, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated April 4, 2007, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated October 11, 2007, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated December 4, 2007, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated May 8, 2008, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.2, and in
Form 8-K dated November 14, 2008, File No. 1-3164 as Exhibit 4.2, and in Form 8-K dated February 26, 2009, File No. 1-3164 as Exhibit 4.2.)
             
    (b)  3  - Amended and Restated Trust Agreement of Alabama Power Capital Trust V dated as of September 1, 2002. (Designated in Form 8-K dated September 26, 2002, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.12-B.)
             
    (b)  4  - Guarantee Agreement relating to Alabama Power Capital Trust V dated as of September 1, 2002. (Designated in Form 8-K dated September 26, 2002, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 4.16-B.)
             
  Georgia Power
             
    (c)  1  - Subordinated Note Indenture dated as of June 1, 1997, between Georgia Power and The Bank of New York Mellon (as successor to JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (formerly known as The Chase Manhattan Bank)), as Trustee, and indentures supplemental thereto through January 23, 2004. (Designated in Certificate of Notification, File No. 70-8461, as Exhibits D and E, in Form 8-K dated February 17, 1999, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.4, in Form 8-K dated June 13, 2002, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.4, in Form 8-K dated October 30, 2002, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.4 and in Form 8-K dated January 15, 2004, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.4.)
             
    (c)  2  - Senior Note Indenture dated as of January 1, 1998, between Georgia Power and The Bank of New York Mellon (as successor to JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (formerly known as The Chase Manhattan Bank)), as Trustee, and indentures supplemental thereto through February 10,December 15, 2009. (Designated in Form 8-K dated January 21, 1998, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibits 4.1 and 4.2, in Forms 8-K each dated November 19, 1998, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated March 3, 1999, File No. 1-6469 as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated February 15, 2000, File No. 1-6469 as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated January 26, 2001, File No. 1-6469 as Exhibits 4.2(a) and 4.2(b), in Form 8-K dated February 16, 2001, File No. 1-6469 as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated May 1, 2001, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated June 27, 2002, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated November 15, 2002, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated February 13, 2003, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated February 21, 2003, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated April 10, 2003, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibits 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3, in Form 8-K dated September 8, 2003, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.1, in Form 8-K dated September 23, 2003, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.1, in Form 8-K dated January 12, 2004, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibits 4.1 and 4.2, in Form 8-K dated February 12, 2004, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.1, in Form 8-K dated August 11, 2004, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibits 4.1 and 4.2, in Form 8-K dated January 13, 2005, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.1, in Form 8-K dated April 12, 2005, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.1, in Form 8-K dated November 30, 2005, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.1, in Form 8-K dated December 8, 2006, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated March 6, 2007, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated June 4, 2007, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated June 18, 2007, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated July 10, 2007, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated October 23,August 24, 2007, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated November 29, 2007, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2, in

E-4


Form 8-K dated March 12, 2008, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated June 5, 2008, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated November 12, 2008, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibits 4.2(a) and 4.2(b), and in Form 8-K dated February 4, 2009, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2, and in Form 8-K dated December 8, 2009, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2.)

E-4


             
    (c)  3  - Senior Note Indenture dated as of March 1, 1998 between Georgia Power, as successor to Savannah Electric, and The Bank of New York Mellon (as successor to JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (formerly known as The Chase Manhattan Bank)), as Trustee, and indentures supplemental thereto through June 30, 2006. (Designated in
Form 8-K dated March 9, 1998, File No. 1-5072, as Exhibits 4.1 and 4.2, in Form 8-K dated May 8, 2001, File No. 1-5072, as Exhibits 4.2(a) and 4.2(b), in Form 8-K dated March 4, 2002, File No. 1-5072, as Exhibit 4.2, in
Form 8-K dated November 4, 2002, File No. 1-5072, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated December 10, 2003, File No. 1-5072, as Exhibits 4.1 and 4.2, in Form 8-K dated December 2, 2004, File No. 1-5072, as Exhibit 4.1, and in Form 8-K dated June 27, 2006, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 4.2.)
             
    (c)  4  - Amended and Restated Trust Agreement of Georgia Power Capital Trust VII dated as of January 1, 2004. (Designated in Form 8-K dated January 15, 2004, as Exhibit 4.7-A.)
             
    (c)  5  - Guarantee Agreement relating to Georgia Power Capital Trust VII dated as of January 1, 2004. (Designated in Form 8-K dated January 15, 2004, as Exhibit 4.11-A.)
             
  Gulf Power
             
    (d)  1  - Senior Note Indenture dated as of January 1, 1998, between Gulf Power and The Bank of New York Mellon (as successor to JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (formerly known as The Chase Manhattan Bank)), as Trustee, and indentures supplemental thereto through June 12, 2007.26, 2009. (Designated in Form 8-K dated June 17, 1998, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibits 4.1 and 4.2, in Form 8-K dated August 17, 1999, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated July 31, 2001, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated October 5, 2001, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated January 18, 2002, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated March 21, 2003, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated July 10, 2003, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibits 4.1 and 4.2, in Form 8-K dated September 5, 2003, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 4.1, in Form 8-K dated April 6, 2004, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 4.1, in Form 8-K dated September 13, 2004, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 4.1, in Form 8-K dated August 11, 2005, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 4.1, in Form 8-K dated October 27, 2005, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 4.1, in Form 8-K dated November 28, 2006, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 4.2, and in Form 8-K dated June 5, 2007, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 4.2, and in Form 8-K dated June 22, 2009, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 4.2.)
             
  Mississippi Power
             
    (e)  1  - Senior Note Indenture dated as of May 1, 1998 between Mississippi Power and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Successor Trustee, and indentures supplemental thereto through November 21, 2008.March 6, 2009. (Designated in Form 8-K dated May 14, 1998, File No. 0-6849, as Exhibits 4.1, 4.2(a) and 4.2(b), in Form 8-K dated March 22, 2000, File No. 0-6849, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated March 12, 2002, File No. 0-6849, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated April 24, 2003, File No. 001-11229, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated March 3, 2004, File No. 001-11229, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated June 24, 2005, File No. 001-11229, as Exhibit 4.2, in Form 8-K dated November 8, 2007, File No. 001-11229, as Exhibit 4.2, and in Form 8-K dated November 14, 2008, File No. 001-11229, as Exhibit 4.2, and in Form 8-K dated March 3, 2009, File No. 001-11229, as Exhibit 4.2.)

E-5


             
  Southern Power
             
    (f)  1  - Senior Note Indenture dated as of June 1, 2002, between Southern Power and The Bank of New York Mellon (as successor to JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (formerly known as The Chase Manhattan Bank))Bank of New York), as Trustee, and indentures supplemental thereto through November 21, 2006. (Designated in Registration No. 333-98553 as Exhibits 4.1 and 4.2 and in Southern Power’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2003, File No. 333-98553, as Exhibit 4(g)1, and in Form 8-K dated November 13, 2006, File No. 333-98553, as Exhibit 4.2.)
             
(10) Material Contracts


Southern Company
             
  # * (a)  1  - Amended and Restated Southern Company 2006 Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan, effective January 1, 2007. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3536, as Exhibit 10(a)1.)
             
  # (a)  2  - FormsForm of 2009 Stock Option Award Agreement for Executive Officers of Southern Company under the Southern Company 2006 Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan effective January 1, 2006.Plan. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006,March 31, 2009, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 10(a)2.1.)
             
  # (a)  3  - Deferred Compensation Plan for Directors of The Southern Company, Amended and Restated effective January 1, 2008. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007, File No. 1-3536, as Exhibit 10(a)3.)
             
  # * (a)  4  - Southern Company Deferred Compensation Plan as amended and restated as of January 1, 2009. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3536, as Exhibit 10(a)4.)
#*(a)5-First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to the Southern Company Deferred Compensation Plan as amended and restated as of January 1, 2009.
             
  # (a)  56  - Outside Directors Stock Plan for The Southern Company and its Subsidiaries, effective May 26, 2004. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 10(a)2.)
             
  # * (a)  67  - The Southern Company Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, Amended and Restated effective January 1, 2009. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3536, as ofExhibit 10(a)6.)
#*(a)8-First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to The Southern Company Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, Amended and Restated effective January 1, 2009.
             
  # * (a)  79  - The Southern Company Supplemental Benefit Plan, Amended and Restated effective as of January 1, 2009. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3536, as Exhibit 10(a)7.)
#*(a)10-First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to The Southern Company Supplemental Benefit Plan, Amended and Restated effective as of January 1, 2009.
             
  # * (a)  811  - Amended and Restated Change in Control Agreement dated December 31, 2008 between Southern Company, SCS,Alabama Power, and G. Edison Holland, Jr.Charles D. McCrary. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3536, as Exhibit 10(a)9.)

E-6


             
  # * (a)  9-Amended and Restated Change in Control Agreement dated December 31, 2008 between Southern Company, Alabama Power, and Charles D. McCrary.
#* (a)1012  - Amended and Restated Change in Control Agreement dated December 31, 2008 between Southern Company, SCS, and David M. Ratcliffe. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3536, as Exhibit 10(a)10.)
             
  # (a)  1113  - The Southern Company Change in Control Benefits Protection Plan, effective December 31, 2008. (Designated in Form 8-K dated December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 10.1.)
             
    (a)  1214  - Master Separation and Distribution Agreement dated as of September 1, 2000 between Southern Company and Mirant. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 10(a)100.)

E-6


             
    (a)  1315  - Indemnification and Insurance Matters Agreement dated as of September 1, 2000 between Southern Company and Mirant. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 10(a)101.)
             
    (a)  1416  - Tax Indemnification Agreement dated as of September 1, 2000 among Southern Company and its affiliated companies and Mirant and its affiliated companies. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 10(a)102.)
             
  # (a)  1517  - Southern Company Deferred Compensation Trust Agreement as amended and restated effective January 1, 2001 between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, SCS, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, SouthernLINC Wireless, Southern Company Energy Solutions, LLC, and Southern Nuclear.Nuclear and First Amendment thereto effective January 1, 2009. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 10(a)103.)
#* (a)16-First Amendment effective January 1, 2009 to103 and in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the Southern Company Deferred Compensation Trust Agreementyear ended December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3536, as amended and restated effective January 1, 2001 between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, SCS, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, SouthernLINC Wireless, Southern Company Energy Solutions, LLC, and Southern Nuclear.Exhibit 10(a)16.)
             
  # (a)  1718  - Deferred Stock Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company and its subsidiaries, dated as of January 1, 2000, between Reliance Trust Company, Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power.Power and First Amendment thereto effective January 1, 2009. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 10(a)104.)
#* (a)18-First Amendment effective January 1, 2009 to104 and in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the Southern Company Deferred Stock Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company and its subsidiaries, datedyear ended December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3536, as of January 1, 2000, between Reliance Trust Company, Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power.Exhibit 10(a)18.)
             
  # (a)  19  - Amended and Restated Deferred Cash Compensation Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company and its subsidiaries, effective September 1, 2001, between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power.Power and First Amendment thereto effective January 1, 2009. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 10(a)92.)
#* (a)20-First Amendment effective January 1, 2009 to92 and in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the Amended and Restated Deferred Cash Compensation Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company and its subsidiaries, effective September 1, 2001, between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power.
#* (a)21-Amended and Restated Change in Control Agreement effectiveyear ended December 31, 2008, between Southern Company, SCS, and Thomas A. Fanning.File No. 1-3536, as Exhibit 10(a)20.)
             
  # (a)  2220  - Amended Deferred Compensationand Restated Change in Control Agreement amongeffective December 31, 2008 between Southern Company, SCS, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and G. Edison Holland, Jr. effective December 31, 2008.Thomas A. Fanning. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 8-K dated10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3526,1-3536, as Exhibit 10.2.10(a)21.)
             
  # * (a)  2321  - Amended and Restated Southern Company Senior Executive Change in Control Severance Plan effective December 31, 2008. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3536, as Exhibit 10(a)23.)

E-7


#*(a)22-First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to the Amended and Restated Southern Company Senior Executive Change in Control Severance Plan effective December 31, 2008.
             
  # * (a)  2423  - Southern Company Executive Change in Control Severance Plan, Amended and Restated effective December 31, 2008. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3536, as Exhibit 10(a)24.)

E-7


#*(a)24-First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to the Southern Company Executive Change in Control Severance Plan, Amended and Restated effective December 31, 2008.
             
  # * (a)  25  - Amended and Restated Change in Control Agreement effective December 31, 2008 between Southern Company, Georgia Power, and Michael D. Garrett. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3536, as Exhibit 10(a)25.)
             
  # * (a)  26  - Amended and Restated Change in Control Agreement effective December 31, 2008 between Southern Company, SCS, and William Paul Bowers. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File No. 1-3536, as Exhibit 10(a)26.)
             
  # (a)  27  - Form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement. (Designated in Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 10(a)1.)
             
  #*(a)  28-Compensation and Retention Agreement between SCS and C. Alan Martin effective as of February 1, 2008. (Designated in Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 10(a)1.)
#* (a)29  - Base Salaries of Named Executive Officers.
             
  # (a)  3029  - Summary of Non-Employee Director Compensation Arrangements. (Designated in Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 10(a)27.)
#(a)30-Form of Terms for Performance Share Awards granted under the Southern Company Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan. (Designated in Form 8-K dated February 9, 2010, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 10.1.)
             
  Alabama Power
             
    (b)  1  - Intercompany Interchange Contract as revised effective May 1, 2007, among Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, Southern Power, and SCS. (Designated in Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 10(b)5.)
             
  # (b)  2  - Amended and Restated Southern Company 2006 Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan, effective January 1, 2007. See Exhibit 10(a)1 herein.
             
  # (b)  3  - FormsForm of 2009 Stock Option Award Agreement for Executive Officers of Southern Company under the Southern Company 2006 Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan effective January 1, 2006.Plan. See Exhibit 10(a)2 herein.
             
  # (b)  4  - Southern Company Deferred Compensation Plan as amended and restated effectiveas of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)4 herein.
             
  # (b)  5  - Outside Directors Stock Plan for TheFirst Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to the Southern Company Deferred Compensation Plan as amended and its Subsidiaries, effective May 26, 2004.restated as of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)5 herein.
             
  # (b)  6  - Outside Directors Stock Plan for The Southern Company Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, Amended and Restatedits Subsidiaries, effective as of January 1, 2009.May 26, 2004. See Exhibit 10(a)6 herein.

E-8


             
  # (b)  7  - The Southern Company Supplemental BenefitExecutive Retirement Plan, Amended and Restated effective as of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)7 herein.
             
  # (b)  8  - First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to The Southern Company Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, Amended and Restated effective January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)8 herein.
#(b)9-The Southern Company Supplemental Benefit Plan, Amended and Restated effective as of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)9 herein.
#(b)10-First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to The Southern Company Supplemental Benefit Plan, Amended and Restated effective as of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)10 herein.
#(b)11-Southern Company Executive Change in Control Severance Plan, Amended and Restated effective December 31, 2008. See Exhibit 10(a)23 herein.
#(b)12-First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to the Southern Company Executive Change in Control Severance Plan, Amended and Restated effective December 31, 2008. See Exhibit 10(a)24 herein.
             
  # (b)  913  - Deferred Compensation Plan for Directors of Alabama Power Company, Amended and Restated effective January 1, 2008. (Designated in Alabama Power’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008, File No.
1-3164, as Exhibit 10(b)1.)
#(b)10-The Southern Company Change in Control Benefits Protection Plan, effective December 31, 2008. See Exhibit 10(a)11 herein.
#(b)11-Southern Company Deferred Compensation Trust Agreement as amended and restated effective January 1, 2001 between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, SCS, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, SouthernLINC Wireless,

E-8


Southern Company Energy Solutions, LLC, and Southern Nuclear. See Exhibit 10(a)15 herein.
#(b)12-First Amendment effective January 1, 2009 to the Southern Company Deferred Compensation Trust Agreement as amended and restated effective January 1, 2001 between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, SCS, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, SouthernLINC Wireless, Southern Company Energy Solutions, LLC, and Southern Nuclear. See Exhibit 10(a)16 herein.
#(b)13-Deferred Stock Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company and its subsidiaries, dated as of January 1, 2000, between Reliance Trust Company, Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power. See Exhibit 10(a)17 herein.
             
  # (b)  14  - First Amendment effective January 1, 2009 to theThe Southern Company Deferred Stock Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company and its subsidiaries, dated as of January 1, 2000, between Reliance Trust Company, Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power.Change in Control Benefits Protection Plan, effective December 31, 2008. See
Exhibit 10(a)1813 herein.
             
  # (b)  15  - Amended and RestatedSouthern Company Deferred Cash Compensation Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Companyas amended and its subsidiaries,restated effective SeptemberJanuary 1, 2001 between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, SCS, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, SouthernLINC Wireless, Southern Company Energy Solutions, LLC, and Mississippi Power.Southern Nuclear and First Amendment thereto effective January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)1917 herein.
             
  # (b)  16  - First Amendment effective January 1, 2009 to the Amended and Restated Deferred Cash CompensationStock Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company and its subsidiaries, effective Septemberdated as of January 1, 2001,2000, between Wachovia Bank, N.A.,Reliance Trust Company, Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power.Power and First Amendment thereto effective January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)2018 herein.
             
  # (b)  17  - Amended and Restated Deferred Cash Compensation Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company Senior Executive Change in Control Severance Planand its subsidiaries, effective December 31, 2008.September 1, 2001, between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power and First Amendment thereto effective January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)2319 herein.
             
  # (b)  18  - Amended and Restated Southern Company Senior Executive Change in Control Agreement datedSeverance Plan effective December 31, 2008 between Southern Company, Alabama Power, and Charles D. McCrary.2008. See Exhibit 10(a)921 herein.
             
  # (b)  19  - First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to the Amended and Restated Southern Company Senior Executive Change in Control Agreement between Southern Company, Alabama Power, and C. Alan Martin,Severance Plan effective June 1, 2004. (Designated in Alabama Power’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, File No. 1-3526, asDecember 31, 2008. See Exhibit 10(b)4.)10(a)22 herein.
             
  # * (b)  20-Amended and Restated Change in Control Agreement dated December 31, 2008 between Southern Company, Alabama Power, and Charles D. McCrary. See Exhibit 10(a)11 herein.

E-9


#*(b)21-Deferred Compensation Agreement between Southern Company, Alabama Power, and SCS and Mark A. Crosswhite dated July 30, 2008.
#*(b)22  - Base Salaries of Named Executive Officers.
             
  # (b)  2123  - Summary of Non-Employee Director Compensation Arrangements. (Designated in Alabama Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 10(b)20.)
             
  # (b)  2224  - Form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement. See Exhibit 10(a)27 herein.

E-9


#(b)25-Form of Terms for Performance Share Awards granted under the Southern Company Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan. See Exhibit 10(a)30 herein.
             
  Georgia Power
             
    (c)  1  - Intercompany Interchange Contract as revised effective May 1, 2007, among Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, Southern Power, and SCS. See Exhibit 10(b)1 herein.
             
    (c)  2  - Revised and Restated Integrated Transmission System Agreement dated as of November 12, 1990, between Georgia Power and OPC. (Designated in Georgia Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 10(g).)
             
    (c)  3  - Revised and Restated Integrated Transmission System Agreement between Georgia Power and Dalton dated as of December 7, 1990. (Designated in Georgia Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No.
1-6468, as Exhibit 10(gg).)
             
    (c)  4  - Revised and Restated Integrated Transmission System Agreement between Georgia Power and MEAG dated as of December 7, 1990. (Designated in Georgia Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No.
1-6468, as Exhibit 10(hh).)
             
  # (c)  5  - Amended and Restated Southern Company 2006 Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan, effective January 1, 2007. See Exhibit 10(a)1 herein.
             
  # (c)  6  - FormsForm of 2009 Stock Option Award Agreement for Executive Officers of Southern Company under the Southern Company 2006 Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan effective January 1, 2006.Plan. See Exhibit 10(a)2 herein.
             
  # (c)  7  - Southern Company Deferred Compensation Plan as amended and restated effectiveas of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)4 herein.
             
  # (c)  8  - Outside Directors Stock Plan for TheFirst Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to the Southern Company Deferred Compensation Plan as amended and its Subsidiaries, effective May 26, 2004.restated as of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)5 herein.
             
  # (c)  9  - Outside Directors Stock Plan for The Southern Company Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, Amended and Restated as of January 1, 2009.its Subsidiaries, effective May 26, 2004. See Exhibit 10(a)6 herein.
             
  # (c)  10  - The Southern Company Supplemental BenefitExecutive Retirement Plan, Amended and Restated effective as of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)7 herein.
             
  # (c)  11  - First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to The Southern Company Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, Amended and Restated effective January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)8 herein.

E-10


#(c)12-The Southern Company Supplemental Benefit Plan, Amended and Restated effective as of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)9 herein.
#(c)13-First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to The Southern Company Supplemental Benefit Plan, Amended and Restated effective as of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)10 herein.
#(c)14-Southern Company Executive Change in Control Severance Plan, Amended and Restated effective December 31, 2008. See Exhibit 10(a)23 herein.
#(c)15-First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to the Southern Company Executive Change in Control Severance Plan, Amended and Restated effective December 31, 2008. See Exhibit 10(a)24 herein.
             
  # (c)  1216  - Deferred Compensation Plan For Directors of Georgia Power Company, Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2008. (Designated in Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007, File No. 1-6468, as
Exhibit 10(c)12.)
             
  # (c)  1317  - The Southern Company Change in Control Benefits Protection Plan, effective December 31, 2008. See
Exhibit 10(a)1113 herein.
             
  # (c)  1418  - Southern Company Deferred Compensation Trust Agreement as amended and restated effective January 1, 2001 between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, SCS, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, SouthernLINC Wireless, Southern Company Energy Solutions, LLC, and Southern Nuclear.Nuclear and First Amendment thereto effective January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)15 herein.

E-10


#(c)15-First Amendment effective January 1, 2009 to the Southern Company Deferred Compensation Trust Agreement as amended and restated effective January 1, 2001 between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, SCS, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, SouthernLINC Wireless, Southern Company Energy Solutions, LLC, and Southern Nuclear. See Exhibit 10(a)16 herein.
#(c)16-Deferred Stock Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company and its subsidiaries, dated as of January 1, 2000, between Reliance Trust Company, Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power. See Exhibit 10(a)17 herein.
#(c)17-First Amendment effective January 1, 2009 to the Southern Company Deferred Stock Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company and its subsidiaries, dated as of January 1, 2000, between Reliance Trust Company, Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power. See Exhibit 10(a)18 herein.
#(c)18-Amended and Restated Deferred Cash Compensation Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company and its subsidiaries, effective September 1, 2001, between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power. See Exhibit 10(a)19 herein.
             
  # (c)  19  - First Amendment effective January 1, 2009 to the Amended and Restated Deferred Cash CompensationStock Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company and its subsidiaries, effective Septemberdated as of January 1, 2001,2000, between Wachovia Bank, N.A.,Reliance Trust Company, Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power.Power and First Amendment thereto effective January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)2018 herein.
             
  # (c)  20  - Amended and Restated Deferred Cash Compensation Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company Senior Executive Change in Control Severance Planand its subsidiaries, effective December 31, 2008.September 1, 2001, between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power and First Amendment thereto effective January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)2319 herein.
             
  # (c)  21  - Deferred Compensation Agreement betweenAmended and Restated Southern Company SCS, and Christopher C. Womack dated May 31, 2002. (DesignatedSenior Executive Change in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year endedControl Severance Plan effective December 31, 2002, File No. 1-3526, as2008. See Exhibit 10(a)118.)21 herein.
             
  # (c)  22  - First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to the Amended and Restated Supplemental PensionSouthern Company Senior Executive Change in Control Severance Plan effective December 31, 2008. See Exhibit 10(a)22 herein.
#*(c)23-Consulting Agreement among SCS, Southern Nuclear, Alabamabetween Cliff S. Thrasher and Georgia Power and James H. Miller, III. (Designated in Alabama Power’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2003, File No. 1-3164, as Exhibit 10(b)1.)dated March 18, 2009.
             
  # (c)  2324  - Amended and Restated Change in Control Agreement effective December 31, 2008 between Southern Company, Georgia Power, and Michael D. Garrett. See Exhibit 10(a)25 herein.
             
  #*(c)24-Amended Deferred Compensation Agreement among Southern Company, SCS, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and G. Edison Holland, Jr. effective December 31, 2008. See Exhibit 10(a)22 herein.
#* (c)  25  - Base Salaries of Named Executive Officers.
             
  #*(c)  26  - Summary of Non-Employee Director Compensation Arrangements. (Designated in Georgia Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 10(c)24.)
             
  # (c)  27  - Form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement. See Exhibit 10(a)27 herein.

E-11


             
    (c)  28  - Engineering, Procurement and Construction Agreement, dated as of April 8, 2008, between Georgia Power, for itself and as agent for OPC, MEAG Power, and Dalton Utilities, as owners, and a consortium consisting of Westinghouse Electric Company LLC and Stone & Webster Inc., as contractor, for Units 3 & 4 at the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant Site. (Georgia Power requested confidential treatment for certain portions of this document pursuant to an application for confidential treatment sent to the SEC. Georgia Power omitted such portions from the filing and filed them separately with the SEC.) (Designated in Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended June 30, 2008, File No. 1-6468, as Exhibit 10(c)1.)
*(c)29-Amendment No. 1, dated as of December 11, 2009, to the Engineering, Procurement and Construction Agreement, dated as of April 8, 2008, between Georgia Power, for itself and as agent for OPC, MEAG Power, and Dalton Utilities, as owners, and a consortium consisting of Westinghouse and Stone & Webster, as contractor, for Units 3 & 4 at the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant Site. (Georgia Power has requested confidential treatment for certain portions of this document pursuant to an application for confidential treatment sent to the SEC. Georgia Power has omitted such portions from the filing and filed them separately with the SEC.)
#(c)30-Form of Terms for Performance Share Awards granted under the Southern Company Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan. See Exhibit 10(a)30 herein.
             
  Gulf Power
             
    (d)  1  - Intercompany Interchange Contract as revised effective May 1, 2007, among Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, Southern Power, and SCS. See Exhibit 10(b)1 herein.
             
    (d)  2  - Unit Power Sales Agreement dated July 19, 1988, between FPC and Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, and SCS. (Designated in Savannah Electric’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1988, File No. 1-5072, as Exhibit 10(d).)
             
    (d)  3  - Amended Unit Power Sales Agreement dated July 20, 1988, between FP&L and Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, and SCS. (Designated in Savannah Electric’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1988, File No. 1-5072, as Exhibit 10(e).)
             
    (d)  4  - Amended Unit Power Sales Agreement dated August 17, 1988, between Jacksonville Electric Authority and Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, and SCS. (Designated in Savannah Electric’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1988, File No. 1-5072, as Exhibit 10(f).)
             
  # (d)  5  - Amended and Restated Southern Company 2006 Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan, effective January 1, 2007. See Exhibit 10(a)1 herein.
             
  # (d)  6  - FormsForm of 2009 Stock Option Award Agreement for Executive Officers of Southern Company under the Southern Company 2006 Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan effective January 1, 2006.Plan. See Exhibit 10(a)2 herein.
             
  # (d)  7  - Southern Company Deferred Compensation Plan as amended and restated effectiveas of January 1, 2009. See
Exhibit 10(a)4 herein.
             
  # (d)  8  - Outside Directors Stock Plan for TheFirst Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to the Southern Company Deferred Compensation Plan as amended and its Subsidiaries, effective May 26, 2004.restated as of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)5 herein.

E-12


             
  # (d)  9  - Outside Directors Stock Plan for The Southern Company Supplemental Benefit Plan, Amended and Restatedits Subsidiaries, effective as of January 1, 2009.May 26, 2004. See Exhibit 10(a)76 herein.
             
  # (d)  10  - The Southern Company Supplemental Benefit Plan, Amended and Restated effective as of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)9 herein.
#(d)11-First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to The Southern Company Supplemental Benefit Plan, Amended and Restated effective as of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)10 herein.
#(d)12-Southern Company Executive Change in Control Severance Plan, Amended and Restated effective December 31, 2008. See Exhibit 10(a)23 herein.
#(d)13-First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to the Southern Company Executive Change in Control Severance Plan, Amended and Restated effective December 31, 2008. See Exhibit 10(a)24 herein.
             
  # (d)  1114  - The Southern Company Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, Amended and Restated effective as of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)6 herein.
#(d)12-Deferred Compensation Plan For Outside Directors of Gulf Power Company, Amended and Restated effective January 1, 2008. (Designated in Gulf Power’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 10(d)1.)

E-12


#(d)13-The Southern Company Change in Control Benefits Protection Plan, effective December 31, 2008. See Exhibit 10(a)11 herein.
#(d)14-Southern Company Deferred Compensation Trust Agreement as amended and restated effective January 1, 2001 between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, SCS, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, SouthernLINC Wireless, Southern Company Energy Solutions, LLC, and Southern Nuclear. See Exhibit 10(a)157 herein.
             
  # (d)  15  - First Amendment effective January 1, 20092010 to theThe Southern Company Deferred Compensation Trust Agreement as amendedSupplemental Executive Retirement Plan, Amended and restatedRestated effective January 1, 2001 between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, SCS, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, SouthernLINC Wireless, Southern Company Energy Solutions, LLC, and Southern Nuclear.2009. See Exhibit 10(a)168 herein.
             
  # (d)  16  - Deferred Stock Trust Agreement forCompensation Plan For Outside Directors of SouthernGulf Power Company, Amended and its subsidiaries, dated as ofRestated effective January 1, 2000, between Reliance Trust Company, Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power,2008. (Designated in Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power. SeePower’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 10(a)17 herein.10(d)1.)
             
  # (d)  17  - First Amendment effective January 1, 2009 to theThe Southern Company Deferred Stock Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company and its subsidiaries, dated as of January 1, 2000, between Reliance Trust Company, Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power.Change in Control Benefits Protection Plan, effective December 31, 2008. See
Exhibit 10(a)1813 herein.
             
  # (d)  18  - Amended and RestatedSouthern Company Deferred Cash Compensation Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Companyas amended and its subsidiaries,restated effective SeptemberJanuary 1, 2001 between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, SCS, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, SouthernLINC Wireless, Southern Company Energy Solutions, LLC, and Mississippi Power.Southern Nuclear and First Amendment thereto effective January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)1917 herein.
             
  # (d)  19  - First Amendment effective January 1, 2009 to the Amended and Restated Deferred Cash CompensationStock Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company and its subsidiaries, effective Septemberdated as of January 1, 2001,2000, between Wachovia Bank, N.A.,Reliance Trust Company, Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power.Power and First Amendment thereto effective January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)2018 herein.
             
  # (d)  20  - Amended and Restated Deferred Cash Compensation Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company Senior Executive Change in Control Severance Planand its subsidiaries, effective December 31, 2008.September 1, 2001, between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power and First Amendment thereto effective January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)2319 herein.
             
  # * (d)  21  - Base Salaries of NamedAmended and Restated Southern Company Senior Executive Officers.Change in Control Severance Plan effective December 31, 2008. See Exhibit 10(a)21 herein.
             
  # (d)  22-First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to the Amended and Restated Southern Company Senior Executive Change in Control Severance Plan effective December 31, 2008. See Exhibit 10(a)22 herein.
#*(d)23-Base Salaries of Named Executive Officers.

E-13


#(d)24  - Summary of Non-Employee Director Compensation Arrangements. (Designated in Gulf Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 10(d)20.)
             
  # (d)  2325  - Form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement. See Exhibit 10(a)27 herein.
(d)26-Power Purchase Agreement between Gulf Power and Shell Energy North America (US), L.P. dated March 16, 2009. (Designated in Gulf Power’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, File No. 0-2429, as Exhibit 10(d)1.) (Gulf Power requested confidential treatment for certain portions of this document pursuant to an application for confidential treatment sent to the SEC. Gulf Power omitted such portions from this filing and filed them separately with the SEC.)
#(d)27-Form of Terms for Performance Share Awards granted under the Southern Company Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan. See Exhibit 10(a)30 herein.
             
  Mississippi Power
             
    (e)  1  - Intercompany Interchange Contract as revised effective May 1, 2007, among Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, Southern Power, and SCS. See Exhibit 10(b)1 herein.

E-13


             
    (e)  2  - Transmission Facilities Agreement dated February 25, 1982, Amendment No. 1 dated May 12, 1982 and Amendment No. 2 dated December 6, 1983, between Entergy Corporation (formerly Gulf States) and Mississippi Power. (Designated in Mississippi Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1981, File No. 0-6849, as Exhibit 10(f), in Mississippi Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1982, File No. 0-6849, as Exhibit 10(f)(2), and in Mississippi Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1983, File No. 0-6849, as Exhibit 10(f)(3).)
             
  # (e)  3  - Amended and Restated Southern Company 2006 Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan, effective January 1, 2007. See Exhibit 10(a)1 herein.
             
  # (e)  4  - FormsForm of 2009 Stock Option Award Agreement for Executive Officers of Southern Company under the Southern Company 2006 Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan effective January 1, 2006.Plan. See Exhibit 10(a)2 herein.
             
  # (e)  5  - Southern Company Deferred Compensation Plan as amended and restated effectiveas of January 1, 2009. See
Exhibit 10(a)4 herein.
             
  # (e)  6  - Outside Directors Stock Plan for TheFirst Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to the Southern Company Deferred Compensation Plan as amended and its Subsidiaries, effective May 26, 2004.restated as of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)5 herein.
             
  # (e)  7  - Outside Directors Stock Plan for The Southern Company Supplemental Benefit Plan, Amended and Restatedits Subsidiaries, effective as of January 1, 2009.May 26, 2004. See Exhibit 10(a)76 herein.
             
  # (e)  8  - The Southern Company Supplemental Benefit Plan, Amended and Restated effective as of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)9 herein.
#(e)9-First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to The Southern Company Supplemental Benefit Plan, Amended and Restated effective as of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)10 herein.

E-14


#(e)10-Southern Company Executive Change in Control Severance Plan, Amended and Restated effective December 31, 2008. See Exhibit 10(a)23 herein.
#(e)11-First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to the Southern Company Executive Change in Control Severance Plan, Amended and Restated effective December 31, 2008. See Exhibit 10(a)24 herein.
             
  # (e)  912  - The Southern Company Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, Amended and Restated effective as of January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)67 herein.
             
  # (e)  1013-First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to The Southern Company Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, Amended and Restated effective January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)8 herein.
#(e)14  - Deferred Compensation Plan for Outside Directors of Mississippi Power Company, Amended and Restated effective January 1, 2008. (Designated in Mississippi Power’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, File No. 0-6849 as Exhibit 10(e)1.)
             
  # (e)  1115  - The Southern Company Change in Control Benefits Protection Plan, effective December 31, 2008. See
Exhibit 10(a)1113 herein.
             
  # (e)  1216  - Southern Company Deferred Compensation Trust Agreement as amended and restated effective January 1, 2001 between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, SCS, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, SouthernLINC Wireless, Southern Company Energy Solutions, LLC, and Southern Nuclear.Nuclear and First Amendment thereto effective January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)15 herein.
#(e)13-First Amendment effective January 1, 2009 to the Southern Company Deferred Compensation Trust Agreement as amended and restated effective January 1, 2001 between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, SCS, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, SouthernLINC Wireless, Southern Company Energy Solutions, LLC, and Southern Nuclear. See Exhibit 10(a)16 herein.
#(e)14-Deferred Stock Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company and its subsidiaries, dated as of January 1, 2000, between Reliance Trust Company, Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power. See Exhibit 10(a)17 herein.

E-14


#(e)15-First Amendment effective January 1, 2009 to the Southern Company Deferred Stock Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company and its subsidiaries, dated as of January 1, 2000, between Reliance Trust Company, Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power. See Exhibit 10(a)18 herein.
#(e)16-Amended and Restated Deferred Cash Compensation Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company and its subsidiaries, effective September 1, 2001, between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power. See Exhibit 10(a)19 herein.
             
  # (e)  17  - First Amendment effective January 1, 2009 to the Amended and Restated Deferred Cash CompensationStock Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company and its subsidiaries, effective Septemberdated as of January 1, 2001,2000, between Wachovia Bank, N.A.,Reliance Trust Company, Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power.Power and First Amendment thereto effective January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)2018 herein.
             
  # (e)  18  - Amended and Restated Deferred Cash Compensation Trust Agreement for Directors of Southern Company Senior Executive Change in Control Severance Planand its subsidiaries, effective December 31, 2008.September 1, 2001, between Wachovia Bank, N.A., Southern Company, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power and First Amendment thereto effective January 1, 2009. See Exhibit 10(a)2319 herein.
             
  # * (e)  19  - Base Salaries of NamedAmended and Restated Southern Company Senior Executive Officers.Change in Control Severance Plan effective December 31, 2008. See Exhibit 10(a)21 herein.
             
  # (e)  20  - First Amendment effective January 1, 2010 to the Amended and Restated Southern Company Senior Executive Change in Control Severance Plan effective December 31, 2008. See Exhibit 10(a)22 herein.
#*(e)21-Base Salaries of Named Executive Officers.
#*(e)22-Summary of Non-Employee Director Compensation Arrangements. (Designated in Mississippi Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, File No. 001-11229, as Exhibit 10(e)20.)
             
  # (e)  2123  - Form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement. See Exhibit 10(a)27 herein.
             
    * (e)  2224  - Cooperative Agreement between the DOE and SCS dated as of December 12, 2008. (Designated in Mississippi Power’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File No. 001-11229, as Exhibit 10(e)22.) (Mississippi Power has requested confidential treatment for certain portions of this document pursuant to an application for confidential treatment sent to the SEC. Mississippi Power has omitted such portions from this filing and filed them separately with the SEC.)

E-15


#(e)25-Form of Terms for Performance Share Awards granted under the Southern Company Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan. See Exhibit 10(a)30 herein.
             
  Southern Power
             
    (f)  1  - Service contract dated as of January 1, 2001, between SCS and Southern Power. (Designated in Southern Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, File No. 1-3526, as Exhibit 10(a)(2).)
             
    (f)  2  - Intercompany Interchange Contract as revised effective May 1, 2007, among Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, Southern Power, and SCS. See Exhibit 10(b)1 herein.
             
    (f)  3  - Power Purchase Agreement between Southern Power and Alabama Power dated as of June 1, 2001. (Designated in Registration No. 333-98553 as Exhibit 10.18.)
             
    (f)  4  - Amended and Restated Power Purchase Agreement between Southern Power and Georgia Power at Plant Autaugaville dated as of August 6, 2001. (Designated in Registration No. 333-98553 as Exhibit 10.19.)
             
    (f)  5  - Contract for thePower Purchase of Firm Capacity and EnergyAgreement between Southern Power and Georgia Power at Plant Goat Rock dated as of July 26,March 30, 2001. (Designated in Registration No. 333-98553 as Exhibit 10.21.10.22.)
             
    (f)  6-Power Purchase Agreement between Southern Power and Georgia Power at Plant Goat Rock dated as of March 30, 2001. (Designated in Registration No. 333-98553 as Exhibit 10.22.)

E-15


(f)7  - Purchase and Sale Agreement, by and between CP Oleander, LP and CP Oleander I, Inc., as Sellers, Constellation Power, Inc. and SP Newco I LLC and SP Newco II LLC, as Purchasers, and Southern Power, as Purchaser’s Parent, for the Sale of Partnership Interests of Oleander Power Project, LP, dated as of April 8, 2005. (Designated in Form 8-K dated June 7, 2005, File No. 333-98553, as Exhibit 2.1)
             
    (f)  87  - Multi-Year Credit Agreement dated as of July 7, 2006 by and among Southern Power, the Lenders (as defined therein), Citibank, N.A., as Administrative Agent, and The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., New York Branch, as Initial Issuing Bank and Amendment Number One thereto. (Designated in Southern Power’s
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006, File No. 333-98553, as Exhibit 10(f)1 and in Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, File No. 333-98553, as Exhibit 10(f)2.) (Omits schedules and exhibits. Southern Power agreed to provide supplementally the omitted schedules and exhibits to the SEC upon request.)
             
    (f)  9-Purchase and Sale Agreement by and between Progress Genco Ventures, LLC and Southern Power Company — DeSoto LLC dated May 8 2006. (Designated in Form 8-K dated May 31, 2006, File No. 333-98553, as Exhibit 2.1.) (Omits schedules and exhibits. Southern Power agreed to provide supplementally the omitted schedules and exhibits to the SEC upon request.) (Southern Power requested confidential treatment for certain portions of this document pursuant to an application for confidential treatment sent to the SEC. Southern Power omitted such portions from the filing and filed them separately with the SEC.)
(f)10-Assignment and Assumption Agreement between Southern Power Company — Desoto LLC and Southern Power effective May 24, 2006. (Designated in Form 8-K dated May 31, 2006, File No. 333-98553, as Exhibit 2.2.)
(f)11  - Purchase and Sale Agreement by and between Progress Genco Ventures, LLC and Southern Power Company — Rowan LLC dated May 8, 2006. (Designated in Southern Power’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006, File No. 333-98553, as Exhibit 10(f)4.) (Omits schedules and exhibits. Southern Power agrees to provide supplementally the omitted schedules and exhibits to the SEC upon request.) (Southern Power requested confidential treatment for certain portions of this document pursuant to an application for confidential treatment sent to the SEC. Southern Power omitted such portions from the filing and filed them separately with the SEC.)
             
    (f)  129  - Assignment and Assumption Agreement between Southern Power Company — Rowan LLC and Southern Power effective May 24, 2006. (Designated in Southern Power’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006, File No. 333-98553, as Exhibit 10(f)5.)

E-16


           
(14) Code of Ethics
 
  Southern Company
           
  *(a)     - The Southern Company Code of Ethics.
           
  Alabama Power
           
  (b)     - The Southern Company Code of Ethics. See Exhibit 14(a) herein.
           
  Georgia Power
           
  (c)     - The Southern Company Code of Ethics. See Exhibit 14(a) herein.

E-16


           
  Gulf Power
           
  (d)     - The Southern Company Code of Ethics. See Exhibit 14(a) herein.
           
  Mississippi Power
           
  (e)     - The Southern Company Code of Ethics. See Exhibit 14(a) herein.
           
  Southern Power
           
  (f)     - The Southern Company Code of Ethics. See Exhibit 14(a) herein.
           
(21) Subsidiaries of Registrants
           
  Southern Company
           
  *(a)     - Subsidiaries of Registrant.
           
  Alabama Power
           
  (b)     - Subsidiaries of Registrant. See Exhibit 21(a) herein.
           
  Georgia Power
           
  (c)     - Subsidiaries of Registrant. See Exhibit 21(a) herein.
           
  Gulf Power
           
  (d)     - Subsidiaries of Registrant. See Exhibit 21(a) herein.
           
  Mississippi Power
           
  (e)     - Subsidiaries of Registrant. See Exhibit 21(a) herein.

E-17


           
  Southern Power
           
   Omitted pursuant to General Instruction I(2)(b) of Form 10-K.
           
(23) Consents of Experts and Counsel
           
  Southern Company
           
  *(a)  1  - Consent of Deloitte & Touche LLP.
           
  Alabama Power
           
  *(b)  1  - Consent of Deloitte & Touche LLP.
           
  Georgia Power
           
  *(c)  1  - Consent of Deloitte & Touche LLP.

E-17


           
  Gulf Power
           
  *(d)  1  - Consent of Deloitte & Touche LLP.
           
  Mississippi Power
           
  *(e)  1  - Consent of Deloitte & Touche LLP.
           
  Southern Power
           
  *(f)  1  - Consent of Deloitte & Touche LLP.
           
(24) Powers of Attorney and Resolutions
           
  Southern Company
           
  *(a)     - Power of Attorney and resolution.
           
  Alabama Power
           
  *(b)     - Power of Attorney and resolution.
           
  Georgia Power
           
  *(c)     - Power of Attorney and resolution.
           
  Gulf Power
           
  *(d)     - Power of Attorney and resolution.
           
  Mississippi Power
           
  *(e)     - Power of Attorney and resolution.

E-18


           
  Southern Power
           
  *(f)     - Power of Attorney and resolution.
           
(31) Section 302 Certifications
           
  Southern Company
           
  *(a)  1  - Certificate of Southern Company’s Chief Executive Officer required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
           
  *(a)  2  - Certificate of Southern Company’s Chief Financial Officer required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

E-18


           
  Alabama Power
           
  *(b)  1  - Certificate of Alabama Power’s Chief Executive Officer required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
           
  *(b)  2  - Certificate of Alabama Power’s Chief Financial Officer required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
           
  Georgia Power
           
  *(c)  1  - Certificate of Georgia Power’s Chief Executive Officer required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
           
  *(c)  2  - Certificate of Georgia Power’s Chief Financial Officer required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
           
  Gulf Power
           
  *(d)  1  - Certificate of Gulf Power’s Chief Executive Officer required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
           
  *(d)  2  - Certificate of Gulf Power’s Chief Financial Officer required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
           
  Mississippi Power
           
  Mississippi Power
*(e)  1  - Certificate of Mississippi Power’s Chief Executive Officer required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
           
  *(e)  2  - Certificate of Mississippi Power’s Chief Financial Officer required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
           
  Southern Power
           
  *(f)  1  - Certificate of Southern Power’s Chief Executive Officer required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
           
  *(f)  2  - Certificate of Southern Power’s Chief Financial Officer required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

E-19


           
(32) Section 906 Certifications
           
  Southern Company
           
  *(a)     - Certificate of Southern Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
           
  Alabama Power
           
  *(b)     - Certificate of Alabama Power’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
           
  Georgia Power
           
  *(c)     - Certificate of Georgia Power’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

E-19


           
  Gulf Power
           
  *(d)     - Certificate of Gulf Power’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
           
  Mississippi Power
           
  *(e)     - Certificate of Mississippi Power’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
           
  Southern Power
           
  *(f)     - Certificate of Southern Power’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
(101)XBRL-Related Documents
Southern Company
*INS-XBRL Instance Document
*SCH-XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document
*CAL-XBRL Taxonomy Calculation Linkbase Document
*DEF-XBRL Definition Linkbase Document
*LAB-XBRL Taxonomy Label Linkbase Document
*PRE-XBRL Taxonomy Presentation Linkbase Document

E-20