Use these links to rapidly review the document
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents



UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K



ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year endedDECEMBER 31, 20072010

Commission
file number
 Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter IRS Employer
Identification No.


1-12869

 

CONSTELLATION ENERGY GROUP, INC.

 

52-1964611

100 CONSTELLATION WAY,             BALTIMORE, MARYLAND                21202
                                         (Address of principal executive offices)                (Zip Code)

410-470-2800
(Registrants' telephone number, including area code)

1-1910 BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY 52-0280210

MARYLAND

(States of incorporation)

750 E. PRATT2 CENTER PLAZA, 110 WEST FAYETTE STREET,             BALTIMORE, MARYLAND                21202
                                         (Address(Address of principal executive offices)                                                                                                   (Zip Code)

410-783-2800410-234-5000
(Registrants' telephone number, including area code)

MARYLAND
(States of incorporation of both registrants)

SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(B) OF THE ACT:

Title of each class
 
 
Name of each exchange on
which registered

Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Common Stock—Without Par Value) New York Stock Exchange Inc.
Chicago Stock Exchange Inc.

Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures

6.20% Trust Preferred Securities ($25 liquidation amount per preferred security) issued by BGE Capital Trust II, fully and unconditionally guaranteed, based on several obligations, by Baltimore Gas and Electric Company


)

 

New York Stock Exchange Inc.

SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(G) OF THE ACT:

Not Applicable

          Indicate by check mark if Constellation Energy Group, Inc. is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ý    No o.

          Indicate by check mark if Baltimore Gas and Electric Company is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ý    No o.

          Indicate by check mark if Constellation Energy Group, Inc. is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o    No ý.

          Indicate by check mark if Baltimore Gas and Electric Company is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o    No ý.

          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, and (2) have been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ý    No o.

          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. o

          Indicate by check mark whether Constellation Energy Group, Inc. has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web-site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ý    No o

          Indicate by check mark whether Baltimore Gas and Electric Company has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web-site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes o    No o

          Indicate by check mark whether Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 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 accelerated filerý        Accelerated filer o        Non-accelerated filero        Smaller reporting company o

          Indicate by check mark whether Baltimore Gas and Electric Company 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 accelerated filero        Accelerated filer o        Non-accelerated filer ý        Smaller reporting company o

          Indicate by check mark whether Constellation Energy Group, Inc. is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act) Yes o    No ý

          Indicate by check mark whether Baltimore Gas and Electric Company is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act) Yes o    No ý

          Aggregate market value of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Common Stock, without par value, held by non-affiliates as of June 30, 20072010 was approximately $15,630,501,504$6,490,790,907 based upon New York Stock Exchange composite transaction closing price.

CONSTELLATION ENERGY GROUP, INC. COMMON STOCK, WITHOUT PAR VALUE
177,923,807199,850,572 SHARES OUTSTANDING ON JANUARY 31, 2008.2011.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Part of Form 10-K
 
Document Incorporated by Reference
III Certain sections of the Proxy Statement for the 20082011 Annual Meeting of Shareholders for Constellation Energy Group, Inc.

          Baltimore Gas and Electric Company meets the conditions set forth in General Instruction I(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-K and is therefore filing this Form in the reduced disclosure format.




TABLE OF CONTENTSTable of Contents


TABLE OF CONTENTS



 
  
  
 Page
    Forward Looking Statements 1
PART I  
 Item 1 Business 2
            Overview Overview2 2
            Generation Business Merchant Energy Business2 3
            NewEnergy Business Baltimore Gas and Electric Company4 10
            Baltimore Gas and Electric Company Other Nonregulated Businesses8 15
            Consolidated Capital Requirements Consolidated Capital Requirements12 15
            Environmental Matters Environmental Matters12 15
            Employees Employees16 17
 Item 1A Risk Factors 1816
 Item 2 Properties 23
 Item 3 Legal Proceedings 25
 Item 4 Submission of Matters to Vote of Security Holders[Removed and Reserved] 25
    Executive Officers of the Registrant (Instruction 3 to Item 401(b) of Regulation S-K) 25
PART II  
 Item 5 Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Shareholder Matters, and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities, and Unregistered Sales of Equity and Use of Proceeds 2726
 Item 6 Selected Financial Data 2927
 Item 7 Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations 3129
 Item 7A Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk 6770
 Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data 6871
 Item 9 Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure 129163
 Item 9A and 9A(T) Controls and Procedures 129163
 Item 9B Other Information 129163
PART III  
 Item 10 Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance 130163
 Item 11 Executive Compensation 130163
 Item 12 Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Shareholder Matters 130164
 Item 13 Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence 131164
 Item 14 Principal Accountant Fees and Services 131164
PART IV  
 Item 15 Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules 132165
 Signatures 138172

Table of Contents


Forward Looking Statements

We make statements in this report that are considered forward looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Sometimes these statements will contain words such as "believes," "anticipates," "expects," "intends," "plans," and other similar words. We also disclose non-historical information that represents management's expectations, which are based on numerous assumptions. These statements and projections are not guarantees of our future performance and are subject to risks, uncertainties, and other important factors that could cause our actual performance or achievements to be materially different from those we project. These risks, uncertainties, and factors include, but are not limited to:

        Given these uncertainties, you should not place undue reliance on these forward looking statements. Please see the other sections of this report and our other periodic reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for more information on these factors. These forward looking statements represent our estimates and assumptions only as of the date of this report.

        Changes may occur after that date, and neither Constellation Energy nor BGE assumeassumes responsibility to update these forward looking statements.


1


Table of Contents


PART I

Item 1. Business


Item 1. BusinessOverview

Overview

Constellation Energy is an energy company that includes a merchant energygeneration business (Generation), a customer supply business (NewEnergy), and BGE, a regulated electric and gas public utility in central Maryland.

        Constellation Energy was incorporated in Maryland on September 25, 1995. On April 30, 1999, Constellation Energy became the holding company for BGE and its subsidiaries. References in this report to "we" and "our" are to Constellation Energy and its subsidiaries, collectively. References in this report to the "regulated business(es)" are to BGE.

        Our merchant energyGeneration business is a competitive provider of energy solutions for a variety of customers. It hasdevelops, owns, owns interests in, and operates electric generation assetsfacilities and a fuel processing facility located in various regions of the United StatesStates. This business also includes an operation that manages certain contractually controlled physical assets, including generating facilities and provides energy solutions to meet customers' needs.owns an interest in a joint venture that owns and operates nuclear generating facilities.

        Our merchant energyNewEnergy business is primarily a competitive provider of energy-related products and services for a variety of customers and focuses on serving the energyselling electricity, natural gas, and capacityother energy-related products to serve customers' requirements (load-serving) of,, and providing other energy products and risk management services for, various customers.services. This business also manages our upstream natural gas activities, designs, constructs, and operates renewable energy, heating, cooling, and cogeneration facilities and provides home improvements, sales of electric and gas appliances, and servicing of heating, air conditioning, plumbing, electrical, and indoor air quality systems.

        BGE is a regulated electric transmission and distribution utility company and a regulated gas distribution utility company with a service territory that covers the City of Baltimore and all or part of ten10 counties in central Maryland. BGE was incorporated in Maryland in 1906.

        Our other nonregulated businesses:

        Constellation Energy maintains a website at constellation.com where copiesEDF the full ownership of our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and any amendments may be obtained free of charge. These reports are posted on our website the same day they are filed with the SEC. The SEC maintains a website (sec.gov), where copies of our filings may be obtained free of charge. The website address for BGE is bge.com. These website addresses are inactive textual references, and the contents of these websites are not part ofprior nuclear development joint venture, UniStar Nuclear Energy, LLC (UNE). We discuss this Form 10-K.comprehensive agreement in more detail inNote 4 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

        In addition, the website for Constellation Energy includes copies of our Corporate Governance Guidelines, Principles of Business Integrity, Corporate Compliance Program, Insider Trading Policy, Policy and Procedures with respect to Related Person Transactions, and Information Disclosure Policy, and the charters of the Audit, Compensation and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees of the Board of Directors. Copies of each of these documents may be printed from our website or may be obtained from Constellation Energy upon written request to the Corporate Secretary.

        The Principles of Business Integrity is a code of ethics that applies to all of our directors, officers, and employees, including the chief executive officer, chief financial officer, and chief accounting officer. We will post any amendments to, or waivers from, the Principles of Business Integrity applicable to our chief executive officer, chief financial officer, or chief accounting officer on our website.


Operating Segments

The percentages of revenues, net (loss) income attributable to common stock, and assets attributable to our operating segments are shown in the tables below. We present information about our operating segments, including certain other items, inNote 3 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 
 Unaffiliated Revenues
 
 
 Merchant Energy
 Regulated
Electric

 Regulated
Gas

 Other
Nonregulated

 
2007 83%12%4%1%
2006 83 11 5 1 
2005 81 12 6 1 

 


 

Net Income (1)


 
 
 Merchant
Energy

 Regulated
Electric

 Regulated
Gas

 Other
Nonregulated

 
2007 83%12%3%2%
2006 77 16 5 2 
2005 67 28 5  
 
 Total Assets
 
 
 Merchant
Energy

 Regulated
Electric

 Regulated
Gas

 Other
Nonregulated

 
2007 73%20%6%1%
2006 75 17 6 2 
2005 77 16 6 1 

 
 Unaffiliated Revenues 
 
 Generation NewEnergy Regulated
Electric
 Regulated
Gas
 Holding
Company
and
Other
 

2010

  8% 68% 19% 5% %

2009

  4  73  18  5   

2008

  4  77  14  5   


 
 Net (Loss) Income Attributable to Common Stock 
 
 Generation NewEnergy Regulated
Electric
 Regulated
Gas
 Holding
Company
and
Other
 

2010

  (128)% 14% 10% 4% %

2009

  107  (9) 1  1   

2008

  (27) (76)   3   


 
 Total Assets 
 
 Generation NewEnergy Regulated
Electric
 Regulated
Gas
 Holding
Company
and
Other
 Eliminations 

2010

  49% 19% 26% 7% 4% (5)%

2009

  53  18  21  6  19  (17)

2008

  50  32  21  6  15  (24)

(1)

Excludes income from discontinued operations in 2007, 2006Generation Business

We develop, own, operate, and 2005 and cumulative effects of changes in accounting principles in 2005 as discussed in more detail in Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.


Merchant Energy Business

Introduction

Our merchant energy business integrates electric generation assets with the marketing and risk management of energy and energy-related products to wholesale and retail customers, allowing us to manage energy price risk over geographic regions and time.

        Our merchant energy business includes:

        Our merchant energy business:

        For years 2007 and prior, we analyze the results of our merchant energy business as follows:

        Beginning in 2008, we will analyze our merchant energy business in terms of Generation, Customer Supply and Global Commodities activities.market.

        We present details about our generating properties inItem 2. Properties.

Mid-Atlantic RegionInvestment in Nuclear Generating Facilities

We own 6,355 MWOn November 6, 2009, we completed the sale of fossil,a 49.99% membership interest in Constellation Energy Nuclear Group LLC and affiliates (CENG), our subsidiary that owns our nuclear and hydroelectric generation capacity in the Mid-Atlantic Region.generating facilities


2


Table of Contents

described below. The total output of these nuclear facilities over the past three years is presented in the following table:

 
 Calvert Cliffs Nine Mile Point Ginna 
 
 MWH Capacity
Factor
 MWH (1) Capacity
Factor
 MWH Capacity
Factor
 
 
 (MWH in millions)
 

2010

  14.0  94% 12.6  93% 4.9  97%

2009

  14.5  96  13.1  97  4.6  91 

2008

  14.7  96  12.8  94  4.7  94 
(1)
Represents our and CENG's (after November 6, 2009) proportionate ownership interest

        In connection with the closing of the transaction with EDF on November 6, 2009, we entered into a power purchase agreement (PPA) with CENG under which we will purchase 85 to 90% of the output that is not sold to third parties under pre-existing PPAs for an initial five year period. Additionally, pursuant to an amendment to the PPA entered into in 2010, beginning on January 1, 2015, and continuing to the end of the lives of the respective nuclear plants, is managed by our global commodities operationwe will purchase 50.01% and EDF will purchase 49.99% of the output of CENG's nuclear plants. We discuss this PPA in more detail inNote 16 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Calvert Cliffs

CENG owns 100% of Calvert Cliffs Unit 1 and Unit 2. Unit 1 entered service in 1974 and is hedged through a combination of power saleslicensed to wholesaleoperate until 2034. Unit 2 entered service in 1976 and retail market participants. Our merchant energy business meets the load-serving requirements of various contracts using the output from the Mid-Atlantic Region and from purchases in the wholesale market.


        BGE transferred all of these facilitiesis licensed to our merchant energy generation subsidiaries on July 1, 2000 as a result of the implementation of electric customer choice and competition among suppliers in Maryland, except for the Handsome Lake facility that commenced operations in mid-2001. The assets transferred from BGE are subject to the lien of BGE's mortgage. We expect the assets to be released from this lien following payment in March 2008 of the last series of bonds outstanding under the mortgage and the subsequent discharge of the mortgage.

        Our merchant energy business supplies BGE with a portion of its market-based standard offer service obligation. For 2007, the peak load supplied to BGE was approximately 3,200 MW.operate until 2036.

Plants with Power Purchase Agreements

We own 2,134 MW of nuclear generation capacity with power purchase agreements for a significant portion of their output. Our facilities with power purchase agreements are the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station (Nine Mile Point) and the R.E. Ginna Nuclear Plant (Ginna). Both Nine Mile Point and Ginna are located within the New York Independent System Operator (NYISO) region.

        We ownCENG owns 100% of Nine Mile Point Unit 1 (620 MW) and 82% of Unit 2 (933 MW).2. The remaining interest in Nine Mile Point Unit 2 is owned by the Long Island Power Authority (LIPA). Unit 1 entered service in 1969 and is licensed to operate until 2029. Unit 2 entered service in 1988 and is licensed to operate until 2046.

        We sellNine Mile Point Unit 2 sells 90% of our share of Nine Mile Point'sthe plant's output to the former owners of the plant at an average price of nearlyapproximately $35 per megawatt-hour (MWH)MWH under agreementsa PPA that terminate between 2009 andterminates in November 2011. The agreements arePPA is unit contingent (if the output is not available because the plant is not operating, there is no requirement to provide output from other sources). The remaining 10% of our sharethe output of Nine Mile Point's outputPoint Unit 2 is managed by our global commodities operationCENG and sold into the wholesale market.primarily to us and EDF.

        After termination of the power purchase agreements,Nine Mile Point Unit 2 PPA, a revenue sharing agreement with the former owners of the plant will begin and continue through November 2021. Under this agreement, which applies only to ourCENG's ownership percentage of Unit 2, a predetermined strike price is compared to the market price for electricity. If the market price exceeds the strike price, then 80% of this excess amount is shared with the former owners of the plant. The average strike price for the first year of the revenue sharing agreement is $40.75 per MWH. The strike price increases two percent annually beginning in the second year of the revenue sharing agreement. The revenue sharing agreement is unit contingent and is based on the operation of the unit.Unit 2.

        WeCENG exclusively operateoperates Unit 2 under an operating agreement with LIPA. LIPA is responsible for 18% of the operating costs (and(including decommissioning costs) and capital expenditures of Unit 2 and has representation on the Nine Mile Point Unit 2 management committee, which provides certain oversight and review functions.

        We ownGinna

CENG owns 100% of the Ginna nuclear facility. Ginna consists of a 581 MW reactor that entered service in 1970 and is licensed to operate until 2029. We sell up to 80%Ginna sells approximately 90% of the plant's output and capacity to the former ownersowner for 10 years ending in 2014 at an average price of $44.00 per MWH under a long term unit contingent power purchase agreement.long-term unit-contingent PPA. The remaining 10% of the output of Ginna is managed by our global commodities operationCENG and sold into the wholesale market.

Competitive SupplyNew Nuclear

In November 2010, as part of our comprehensive agreement with EDF to restructure the relationship between our two companies, we sold our 50% ownership interest in UNE to EDF. EDF is now the sole owner of UNE, and we will no longer have responsibility for developing or financing new nuclear projects through UNE. As discussed inNote 4 to Consolidated Financial Statements, we will cause CENG to transfer to UNE two potential new nuclear sites upon receipt of necessary approvals.

Qualifying Facilities and Power Projects

We hold up to a 50% voting interest in 15 operating energy projects, totaling approximately 758 MW, that consist of electric generation (primarily relying on alternative fuel sources), fuel processing, or fuel handling facilities. Thirteen of the electric generation projects are considered qualifying facilities under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978. Each electric generating plant sells its output to a local utility under long-term contracts.

Contracted Generation

We manage approximately 1,100 MWs under three agreements with third party generators in which we have long-dated contractual rights to purchase power from these third party generating plants. The economics of these transactions are similar to our owned generation.


3


Table of Contents


NewEnergy Business

We are a leading supplier of energy products and services to wholesale customers and retail commercial, industrial, and governmental customers. In 2007, our wholesale competitive supply operation provided approximately 16,500 peak MWs of wholesale full requirements load-serving products. During 2007, our retail competitive supply activities served approximately 16,200 MW of peak load and approximately 410,000 mmBTUs ofelectricity, natural gas.

Wholesale and Retail Load-Serving Activities

Our wholesale competitive supply operation structures transactions that serve the full energy and capacity requirements of various customers such as distribution utilities, municipalities, cooperatives, and retail aggregators that do not own sufficient generating capacity or in-house supply functions to meet their own load requirements.

        Our retail competitive supply operation structures transactions to supply full energy and capacity requirements and provide natural gas, transportation, and other energy products and services to wholesale and retail commercial, industrial,electric and governmentalnatural gas customers. Contracts with these customers generally extend from one to ten years, but some can be longer.

        To meet our customers' load-serving requirements, our merchant energyNewEnergy business obtains energy from various sources, including:


        During 2010, our NewEnergy business:

        Our NewEnergy business also manages certain contractually controlled physical assets, including generation facilities (excluding long-dated tolling agreements managed by our Generation business), and natural gas contracts.
properties, provides risk management services, and trades energy and energy-related commodities. This business also provides the wholesale risk management function for our Generation business, as well as structured products and energy investment activities and includes our actual hedged positions with third parties.

        Our NewEnergy business also manages our upstream natural gas activities, designs, constructs, and operates renewable energy, heating, cooling, and cogeneration facilities and provides home improvements, sales of electric and gas appliances, and servicing of heating, air conditioning, plumbing, electrical, and indoor air quality systems.

Wholesale Customer Supply

In 2010, our wholesale NewEnergy customer supply operation served approximately 57 million MWHs of wholesale full requirements electricity and related load-serving products.

        Our wholesale NewEnergy customer supply operation structures transactions that serve the full energy and capacity requirements of various customers such as distribution utilities, municipalities, cooperatives and retail aggregators that do not own sufficient generating capacity or have in-house supply functions to meet their own load requirements.

Retail Customer Supply

During 2010, our retail NewEnergy customer supply operation served approximately 62 million MWHs of electricity load and approximately 334 million mmBTUs of natural gas.

        Our retail NewEnergy customer supply operation structures transactions to supply full energy and capacity requirements and provide natural gas, transportation, and other energy products and services to commercial, industrial, governmental, and residential customers. Contracts with these customers generally extend from one to ten years, but some can be longer.

        The retail NewEnergy customer supply operation combines a unified sales force with a customer-centric model that leverages technology to broaden the range of products and services we offer, which we believe promotes stronger customer relationships. This model focuses on efficiency and cost reduction, which we believe will provide a platform that is scalable and able to capitalize on opportunities for future growth.

Structured Products

Our NewEnergy business uses energy and energy-related commodities and contracts in order to manage our portfolio of energy purchases and sales to customers through structured transactions. Our NewEnergy business assists customers with customized risk management products in the power, gas, coal, and freight markets (e.g., generation tolls and gas transport and storage).

Energy Investments

Our NewEnergy business has investments in energy assets that primarily include natural gas activities. Our NewEnergy business includes upstream (exploration and production) and downstream (transportation and storage) natural gas operations. Our upstream natural gas activities include the development, exploration, and exploitation of natural gas properties, as well as an approximately 28.5% interest in Constellation Energy Partners LLC (CEP), a limited liability company that we formed. CEP is principally engaged in the acquisition, development, and exploitation of natural gas properties. We no longer have any active involvement in the day-to-day operations of CEP.

Portfolio Management and Trading

Our NewEnergy business transacts in energy and energy-related commodities in order to manage our portfolio of energy purchases and sales to customers through structured transactions. We continue to identify and pursue opportunitiesuse economic value


4


Table of Contents

at risk, which can generate additional returns throughmeasures the market risk in our total portfolio, management and trading activities within our business. These opportunities have increased due to the significant growth in scaleencompassing all aspects of our competitive supply operations.NewEnergy business, along with daily value at risk limits, stop loss limits, position limits, generation hedge ratios, and liquidity guidelines to restrict the level of risk in our portfolio.

        In managing our portfolio, we may terminate, restructure, or acquire contracts. Such transactions are within the normal course of managing our portfolio and may materially impact the timing of our recognition of revenues, fuel and purchased energy expenses, and cash flows.

        Our global commodities operation actively uses energy and energy-related commodities and contracts for those commodities in order to manage our portfolio of energy purchases and sales to customers through structured transactions. We use both derivative and nonderivative contracts in managing our portfolio of energy sales and purchase contracts. Generally, we expect to use both derivative and nonderivative contracts to hedge our portfolio in order to reduce volatility. Although a substantial portion of our portfolio is hedged, we are able to identify opportunities to deploy risk capital to increase the value of our accrual positions, which we characterize as portfolio management.

        We trade        Active portfolio management is intended to allow our NewEnergy business to:

        We discuss the impact of our trading activities and economic value at risk in more detail inItem 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis.

        TheseOur portfolio management and trading activities involve the use of physical commodity inventories and a variety of instruments, including:

        ActiveBeginning in the fourth quarter of 2008 and continuing throughout 2010, we reduced the risk and scale of our portfolio management allowsand trading activities. Energy trading activities were scaled back and are being used primarily for hedging our merchant energy business to:

Coal and International Services

Our global commodities operation participates in global coal sourcing activities by providing coal and coal-related logistical services for the variable or fixed supply needs of global customers. In late 2006, we formed a shipping joint venture that will own and operate six freight ships for the delivery of coal and other dry bulk freight products. We own a 50% interest in this joint venture. In 2007, we delivered approximately 28 million tons of coal to global customers and trading activities' contribution to our own generation fleet. Additionally, we entered into power, natural gas, freight, and emissions transactions outside of the United States. We also include in our coal services the results from our synthetic fuel processing facility in South Carolina. In 2008, these synthetic fuel processing facilities will be decommissioned.

        We will continue to evaluate new international opportunities, including expanding our coal sourcing, freight, power, natural gas and emissions activities outside of the United States.operating results.

Natural Gas Services

Our global commodities operation includes upstream (exploration and production) and downstream (transportation and storage) natural gas operations. Our upstream activities include the acquisition, development, and exploitation of natural gas properties. Our downstream activities include providing natural gas to various customers, including large utilities, commercial and industrial customers, power generators, wholesale marketers, and retail aggregators.

        In 2007, 2006 and 2005, we acquired working interests in gas producing fields. We discuss these acquisitions in more detail inNote 15 to Consolidated Financial Statements.


        In November 2006, we completed the initial public offering of Constellation Energy Partners LLC (CEP), a limited liability company that we formed. CEP is principally engaged in the acquisition, development, and exploitation of natural gas properties. During 2007, CEP conducted additional equity issuances in which we did not participate, and our ownership percentage fell below 50 percent. Therefore, in 2007, we deconsolidated CEP and began to account for our interest under the equity method of accounting. We discuss the impact of CEP's equity issuances and deconsolidation on our financial results in more detail inNote 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Other

We hold up to a 50% voting interest in 24 operating energy projects that consist of electric generation (primarily relying on alternative fuel sources), fuel processing, or fuel handling facilities. Of those, the electric generation projects are considered qualifying facilities under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978. Each electric generating plant sells its output to a local utility under long-term contracts.

        We also provide operation and maintenance services, including testing and start-up, to owners of electric generating facilities.

UniStar Nuclear

In 2005, we formed UniStar Nuclear, LLC (UniStar), a joint enterprise with AREVA NP, Inc., (AREVA) to introduce the advanced design Evolutionary Power Reactor to the U.S. market. Upon conversion to U.S. electrical standards, the technology will be known as the U.S. EPR.

        In August 2007, we formed a joint venture, UniStar Nuclear Energy, LLC (UNE) with an affiliate of Electricite de France, SA (EDF). We have a 50% ownership interest in this joint venture to develop, own, and operate new nuclear projects in the United States and Canada. The agreement with EDF includes a phased-in cash investment of $625 million by EDF in UNE. Initially, EDF invested $350 million of cash in UNE, and we contributed UniStar and other UniStar-related assets, which had a book value of $49 million, and the right to develop new nuclear projects at our existing nuclear plant locations. Upon reaching certain licensing milestones, EDF will contribute up to an additional $275 million of cash in UNE for a total of $625 million. In the event that the joint venture is terminated, the remaining equity of UNE, after certain expenses, will be divided equally between Constellation Energy and EDF pursuant to the joint venture agreement.

        In connection with this joint venture, we entered into an investor agreement with EDF under which EDF may purchase in the open market up to a total of 9.9% of our outstanding common stock during the next five years, with a limit of 5% ownership during the first twelve months of the agreement. EDF has agreed to vote any shares of our common stock owned by it in the manner recommended by our board of directors and not take any actions that seek control of Constellation Energy during the next five years.

Fuel Sources

Our power plants use diverse fuel sources. Our plants' fuel mix based on capacity owned at December 31, 20072010 and our generation based on actual output by fuel type in 2007 wereduring 2010 was as follows:

Fuel
 Capacity Owned
 Generation
 
Nuclear 45%61%
Coal 31 35 
Natural Gas 7  
Oil 8  
Renewable and Alternative (1) 5 4 
Dual (2) 4  

Fuel
 Capacity
Owned
 Generation 

Nuclear (1)

  21% 45%

Coal

  30  37 

Natural Gas

  31  13 

Oil

  8   

Renewable and Alternative (2)

  6  5 

Dual (3)

  4   
(1)
Reflects our 50.01% ownership interest in CENG.

(2)
Includes solar, geothermal, hydro, waste coal, and biomass.

(2)(3)
Switches between natural gas and oil.

        We discuss our risks associated with fuel in more detail inItem 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis—Market Risk.Risk Management.

Nuclear

The output ofCENG, our nuclear facilities overjoint venture with EDF, owns the past five years (including periods prior to our acquisition ofCalvert Cliffs, Nine Mile Point, and Ginna in June 2004) is presented in the following table:

 
 Calvert Cliffs
 Nine Mile Point
 Ginna
 
 
 MWH
 Capacity
Factor

 MWH*
 Capacity
Factor

 MWH
 Capacity
Factor

 
 
 (MWH in millions)

 
2007 14.3 94%12.3 90%4.9 98%
2006 13.8 90 12.8 93 4.1 93 
2005 14.7 97 12.7 93 4.0 93 
2004 14.5 96 12.1 89 4.3 100 
2003 13.7 93 12.2 90 3.9 90 

*represents our proportionate ownership interestnuclear generating facilities.

        The supply of fuel for these nuclear generating stationsfacilities includes the:


Uranium and ConversionWe have commitments that provide for sufficient quantities of uranium (concentrates and uranium hexafluoride) for the next several years.
EnrichmentWe have commitments that provide for our uranium enrichment requirements for the next several years.
Fuel Assembly FabricationWe have commitments for the fabrication of fuel assemblies for reloads required for the next several years for Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Inc. (Calvert Cliffs), Nine Mile Point and for Ginna.

        CENG has commitments that provide for quantities of uranium, conversion, enrichment, and fabrication of fuel assemblies to substantially meet expected requirements for the next several years at these nuclear generating facilities.

        The nuclear fueluranium markets are competitive, and while prices can be volatile; however, we dovolatile, CENG does not anticipate any significant problems in meeting ourits future supply requirements.

Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel—Federal FacilitiesFuel
One of the issues associated with the operation and decommissioning of nuclear generating facilities is disposal of spent nuclear fuel. There are no facilities for the reprocessing or permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel currently in operation in the United States, and the NRC has not licensed any such facilities.

The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, (NWPA) requiredas amended, ("NWPA") requires the federal government, through the Department of Energy (DOE), to develop a repository for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste.

        As required by Although the NWPA we are a party to contracts with the DOE to provide for disposal of spent nuclear fuel from our nuclear generating plants. The NWPA and our contracts with the DOE require payments to the DOE of one tenth of one cent (one mill) per kilowatt hour on nuclear electricity generated and sold to pay for the cost of long-term nuclear fuel storage and disposal. We continue to pay those fees into the DOE's Nuclear Waste Fund for our nuclear generating facilities. The NWPA and ourCENG's contracts with the DOE required the DOE to begin taking possession of spent nuclear fuel generated by nuclear generating units no later than


5


Table of Contents

January 31, 1998.1998, the DOE has failed to meet its obligation. The DOE's delay in taking possession of spent fuel has required CENG to undertake additional actions and incur costs to provide on-site dry fuel storage at all three of its nuclear sites. CENG has installed additional capacity at its independent spent fuel storage installation ("ISFSI") at Calvert Cliffs, has constructed an ISFSI at Ginna, and is constructing an ISFSI to be placed in service at Nine Mile Point in 2012.

        ThePrior to 2010, the DOE hashad stated that it may not meet thatits obligation until 20172020 at the earliest. This delay has required that we undertake additional actionsDuring 2010, the DOE requested the withdrawal of its license application to provide on-site fuel storage at ouruse Yucca Mountain as a national repository for spent nuclear generating facilities, includingfuel. At this time, CENG is not able to determine whether the installationDOE will be able to commence meeting its obligation by 2020.

        Each of on-site dry fuel storage capacity as described in more detail below.

        In 2004,CENG's plant subsidiaries have filed complaints were filed against the federal government in the United StatesU.S. Court of Federal Claims seeking to recover damages caused by the DOE's failure to meet its contractual obligation to begin disposing of spent nuclear fuel by January 31, 1998. TheseThe cases are currently stayed, pending litigation in other related cases.

        In connection with our purchase of Ginna, all of the former owner's rights and obligations related to recovery of damages for DOE's failure to meet its contractual obligations were assigned to us. However, we have an obligation to reimburse the former owner for up to $10 million of any recovered damages for such claims.

Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel—On-Site Facilities
Calvert Cliffs has a license Any funds received from the NRCDOE that represent the reimbursement of costs incurred prior to operate an on-site independent spent fuel storage installation that expiresNovember 6, 2009, the date we sold a 49.99% membership interest in 2012. We have storage capacity at Calvert Cliffs thatCENG to EDF, will accommodate spent fuel from operations through 2011. In addition, we can expand our temporary storage capacity at Calvert Cliffsbelong to meet future requirements until approximately 2025. Nine Mile Pointus, and Ginna are developing independent spent fuel storage installations at eachany funds representing the reimbursement of those facilities, which we expectcosts incurred after November 6, 2009 will belong to be completed in 2011 and 2010, respectively. Nine Mile Point and Ginna have sufficient storage capacity within the plant until the expected completion of the on-site independent spent fuel storage installations.
CENG.

Cost for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities
We are

When Constellation Energy sold a 49.99% membership interest in CENG on November 6, 2009, we deconsolidated CENG for financial reporting purposes and, as a result, the decommissioning trust funds were removed from our Consolidated Balance Sheets. CENG is obligated to decommission ourits nuclear power plants after these plants cease operation. Every two years,

        Decommissioning activities are currently projected to be staged through the NRC requires us to demonstrate reasonable assurance that funds will be available to decommission2080 decade. Any changes in the sites. When BGE transferred allcosts or timing of its nuclear generating assets to our merchant energy business, it also transferreddecommissioning activities, or changes in the fund earnings, could affect the adequacy of the funds accumulated to paycover the decommissioning of the plants, and if there were to be a shortfall, additional funding would have to be provided by CENG. CENG has the ability to request funding assistance from both Constellation Energy and EDF, as the owners of CENG.

Calvert Cliffs

In March 2008, Constellation Energy, BGE, and a Constellation Energy affiliate entered into a settlement agreement with the State of Maryland, the Public Service Commission of Maryland (Maryland PSC), and certain State of Maryland officials. The settlement agreement became effective on June 1, 2008. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement, BGE customers were relieved of the potential future liability for decommissioning Calvert Cliffs. At December 31, 2007,Cliffs Unit 1 and Unit 2. BGE will continue to collect the external Calvert Cliffs trust fund assets were $457.4 million.

        Under the Maryland Public Service Commission's (Maryland PSC) order regarding the deregulation of$18.7 million annual nuclear decommissioning charge from all electric generation, BGE ratepayers must pay a total of $520 million, in 1993 dollars adjusted for inflation,customers through 2016 and continue to decommission Calvert Cliffs through fixed annual collections. BGE is collectingrebate this amount on behalf of Calvert Cliffs. Any costs to decommission Calvert Cliffs in excess of this $520 million, in 1993 dollars adjusted for inflation, must be paidresidential electric customers, as previously required by Calvert Cliffs. If BGE ratepayers have paid more than this amount at the time of decommissioning, Calvert Cliffs must refund the excess. If the cost to decommission Calvert Cliffs is less than the $520 million, in 1993 dollars adjusted for inflation, BGE's ratepayers are obligated to pay, Calvert Cliffs may keep the difference.


        In 2006, BGE received approval from the Maryland PSC to continue previously approved annual customer collections for decommissioning of approximately $18.7 million through December 31, 2016. BGE will be required to submit a filing to determine the level of customer contributions after December 31, 2016. Senate Bill 1 which was enacted in June 2006, requires BGE to provide credits to residential electric customers equal to the amount collected for decommissioning annually for 10 years beginning January 1, 2007. Under the provisions of Senate Bill 1, we are required to apply the collection of the nuclear decommissioning trust funds over the ten year period beginning January 1, 2007 toward the fulfillment of the decommissioning obligations of BGE ratepayers. As discussed inItem 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis—Business Environment—Regulation—Maryland—Senate Bills 1 and 400 section, we have notified the State of Maryland of our intent to file an action challenging the legality of this Senate Bill 1 requirement.

        The sellers of Nine Mile Point transferred a $441.7 million decommissioning trust fund to us at the time of sale. In return, we assumed all liability for the costs to decommission Unit 1 and 82% of the costs to decommission Unit 2. We believe that this amount is adequate to cover our responsibility for decommissioning Nine Mile Point to a greenfield status (restoration of the site so that it substantially matches the natural state of the surrounding properties and the site's intended use). At December 31, 2007, the Nine Mile Point trust fund assets were $610.2 million.

        The seller of Ginna transferred $200.8 million in decommissioning funds to us. In return, we assumed all liability for the costs to decommission the unit. We believe that this amount will be sufficient to cover our responsibility for decommissioning Ginna to a greenfield status. At December 31, 2007, the Ginna trust fund assets were $263.2 million.2006.

Coal

We purchase the majority of our coal for electric generation under supply contracts with miningmine operators, and we acquire the remainder in the spot or forward coal markets. The actual fuel quantities required can vary substantially from year to year depending upon the relationship between energy prices and fuel costs, weather conditions, and operating requirements. We believe that we will be able to renew supply contracts as they expire or enter into contracts with other coal suppliers. Our primary coal burningcoal-burning facilities have the following requirements:

 
 Approximate
Annual Coal
Requirement
(tons)

 Special Coal
Restrictions

Brandon Shores
Shores—Units 1 and 2 (combined)

 3,500,0002,800,000 Sulfur content less than 1.20 lbs of SO2/mmBTU

C. P. Crane
Crane—Units 1 and 2 (combined) (1)

 850,0001,000,000 Low ash melting temperature

H. A. Wagner
Wagner—Units 2 and 3 (combined)

 1,100,000800,000 Sulfur content less than 1.60 lbs of SO2/mmBTU
(1)
Assuming 100% sub-bituminous coal

        CoalWe receive coal deliveries to these facilities are made by rail and barge. Over the past few years, we expanded our coal sources through a variety of methods, including restructuring our rail and terminal contracts, increasing the range of coals we can consume, adding synthetic fuel as an alternate source, and finding potential other coal supply sources including limited shipments from various international sources. While we primarily use coal produced from mines located in central and northern Appalachia, we are capable of switchingusing sub-bituminous coal from the Western United States at C.P. Crane and have the ability to switch to using imported coalscoal at Brandon Shores and H.A. Wagner to manage our coal supply. Synthetic fuel will no longer be burned as an alternate source since tax credits for synthetic fuel expired on December 31, 2007. The timely delivery of coal together with the maintenance of appropriate levels of inventory is necessary to allow for continued, reliable generation from these facilities.

        As discussed in theEnvironmental Matters section, our Maryland coal-fired generating facilities must comply with the requirements of the Maryland Healthy Air Act (HAA), which requires reduction of sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxide (NOx), and mercury emissions. To comply with the HAA requirements, we


6


Table of Contents

are planning to burn domestic and/or import compliance coals (1.2 lb/mmbtu SO2 or less) at H.A. Wagner. The C.P. Crane station was converted to burn up to 100% sub-bituminous coal in June 2010. In March 2010, we completed installation of flue gas desulfurization (FGD) equipment on both Brandon Shores units. With the FGD installation, Brandon Shores now is able to burn higher sulfur coals (limit 6 lbs/mmbtu or approximately 3.5% sulfur) while simultaneously reducing station emissions. The blend of coals actually procured for Brandon Shores will be optimized to achieve the lowest delivered cost while complying with HAA limitations.

        We own an undivided interest in the Keystone and Conemaugh electric generating plants in Western Pennsylvania. Our ownership interests in these plants are 20.99% in Keystone and 10.56% in Conemaugh. All of the Conemaugh and Keystone plants' annual coal requirements are purchased by the plant operators from regional suppliers on the open market. FGD equipment was installed on both of the Keystone units in 2009 and has been installed on both Conemaugh units since the mid-1990s. The sulfurFGD SO2 restrictions on coal are 6 lbs/mmbtu (or approximately 2.3%3.7% sulfur) for the Keystone plant and approximately 5.3%4.9 lbs/mmbtu (or 3% sulfur) for the Conemaugh plant. The blend of coal procured is optimized to ensure compliance with station emission limits at the lowest delivered cost.

        The annual coal requirements for the ACE, Jasmin, and Poso plants, which are located in California, are supplied under contracts with mining operators. These plants are restricted to coal with sulfur content less than 2.0%4.0%.

        The primary fuel source for Panther Creek and Colver generating facilities' primary fuel sourcefacilities is waste coal. These facilities meet their annual requirements through existing reserves of mined and processed waste coal and through supply agreements with various terms.


        All of our coal requirements reflect historicalexpected generating levels. The actual fuel quantities required can vary substantially from historical generating levels depending upon the relationship between energy prices and fuel costs, weather conditions, and operating requirements. However, we believe that we will be able to obtain adequate quantities of coal to meet our requirements.

Gas

We purchase natural gas, storage capacity, and transportation, as necessary, for electric generation at certain plants. Some of our gas-fired units can use residual fuel oil or distillates instead of gas. Gas is purchased under contracts with suppliers on the spot market and forward markets, including financial exchanges and under bilateral agreements. The actual fuel quantities required can vary substantially from year to year depending upon the relationship between energy prices and fuel costs, weather conditions, and operating requirements. However, we believe that we will be able to obtain adequate quantities of gas to meet our requirements.

Oil
Under normal burn practices,

From 2008 through 2010, our requirements for residual fuel oil (No. 6) amountamounted to approximately 1.0 million to 1.5less than 0.5 million barrels of low-sulfur oil per year. Deliveries of residual fuel oil are made from the suppliers' Baltimore Harbor and Philadelphia marine terminals for distribution to the various generating plant locations. Also, based on normal burn practices, we require approximately 8.0 million to 11.0 million gallons of distillates (No. 2 oil and kerosene) annually, but these requirements can vary substantially from year to year depending upon the relationship between energy prices and fuel costs, weather conditions, and operating requirements. Distillates are purchased from the suppliers' Baltimore truck terminals for distribution to the various generating plant locations. We have contracts with various suppliers to purchase oil at spot prices, and for future delivery, to meet our requirements.

Competition

We encounter competition from companies of various sizes, having varying levels of experience, financial and human resources, and differing strategies.

        We face competition in the market for energy, capacity, and ancillary services. In our merchant energyNewEnergy business, we compete with international, national, and regional full servicefull-service energy providers, merchants, and producers to obtain competitively priced supplies from a variety of sources and locations, and to utilize efficient transmission, transportation, or storage. We principally compete on the basis of price, customer service, reliability, and availability of our products.

        With respect to power generation,our Generation business, we compete in the operation of energy-producing projects, and our competitors in this business are both domestic and international organizations, including various utilities, industrial companies and independent power producers (including affiliates of utilities, financial investors, banks and investment banks), some of which have greater financial resources.

        StatesMany states are considering different types of regulatory initiatives concerning competition in the power and gas industry, which makes a general assessment of the state of competitive assessmentmarkets difficult. Increased competition that resulted from some of these initiatives in several states contributed in some instances to a reduction in electricity prices and put pressure on electric utilities to lower their costs, including the cost of purchased electricity. Many states continue to support or expand retail competition and industry restructuring. Other states that were considering deregulationrestructuring have slowed their plans or postponed consideration of deregulation.competitive markets. In addition, certain previouslystates that have restructured states are considering reregulation of their retail markets.energy markets routinely consider new market rules including return to monopoly service measures that could result in more limited opportunities for competitive energy suppliers like Constellation Energy. While there is significant activity in this area, we believe there is


7


Table of Contents

adequate growth potential in the current deregulated market and that further market changes could provide additional opportunities for our merchant energy business.competitive market.

        As theThe market for commercial, industrial, and governmental energy supply continues to grow and we have experiencedcontinue to experience increased competition from energy and non-energy market participants on a regional and national basis in our retail competitivecustomer supply activities. The increase inStrong retail competition and the impact of wholesale power prices compared to the rates charged by local utilities has, in certain circumstances, reducedaffects the margins thatcontract margin we realizereceive from our customers. However, we believe that ourRecent economic conditions have increased overall margins reflecting an appropriate return on capital to support the business. Our experience and expertise in assessing and managing risk and our strong focus on customer service willshould help us to remain competitive during volatile or otherwise adverse market circumstances.


Merchant EnergyGeneration and NewEnergy Operating Statistics

 
 2007
 2006
 2005
 2004
 2003

Revenues(In millions)               
 Mid-Atlantic Region $3,462.2 $2,813.5 $2,283.9 $1,925.6 $1,696.2
 Plants with Power Purchase Agreements  657.3  650.5  665.9  555.3  463.3
 Competitive Supply—Retail  9,086.3  8,014.7  6,942.3  4,280.0  2,567.7
 Competitive Supply—Wholesale  5,469.4  5,612.7  4,672.3  3,353.8  2,703.9
 Other  69.3  74.8  58.0  73.6  45.1

Total Revenues $18,744.5 $17,166.2 $14,622.4 $10,188.3 $7,476.2

Generation(In millions)—MWH*  51.6  59.1  60.2  55.3  51.6

*Includes output from gas-fired plants until sale in December 2006.

 
 2010
 2009
 2008
 
  

Gross Margin(In millions)

          
 

Generation (1)

 $800 $2,082 $2,042 
 

NewEnergy

  1,244  1,079  1,040 
  

Total Gross Margin

 $2,044 $3,161 $3,082 
  

Generation(In millions)—MWH (1)(2)

  35.1  46.0  50.9 
  

Operating statistics do not reflect the elimination of intercompany transactions.

(1)
2009 reflects our 100% ownership in our nuclear business through November 6, 2009 and our 50.01% ownership in our nuclear business from November 6, 2009 through December 31, 2009 following the sale of a 49.99% membership interest in CENG. These amounts also exclude contracted generation.

(2)
These amounts exclude contracted generation.



Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

BGE is an electric transmission and distribution utility company and a gas distribution utility company with a service territory that covers the City of Baltimore and all or part of ten counties in central Maryland. BGE is regulated by the Maryland PSC and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) with respect to rates and other aspects of its business.

        BGE's electric service territory includes an area of approximately 2,300 square miles. There are no municipal or cooperative wholesale customers within BGE's service territory. BGE's gas service territory includes an area of approximately 800 square miles.

        BGE's electric and gas revenues come from many customers—residential, commercial, and industrial.

Electric Business

Electric Competition

Deregulation

Effective July 1, 2000,Maryland has implemented electric customer choice and competition among electric suppliers was implemented in Maryland.suppliers. As a result, of the deregulation of electric generation, all customers can choose their electric energy supplier.supplier, which includes subsidiaries of Constellation Energy. While BGE does not sell electric commodityelectricity to all customers in its service territory, BGE continues to deliver electricity to all customers and provides meter reading, billing, emergency response, and regular maintenance.

Standard Offer Service

BGE is obligated by the Maryland PSC to provide market-based standard offer service (SOS) to all of its electric customers.customers who elect not to select a competitive energy supplier. The SOS rates charged recover BGE's wholesale power supply costs and include an administrative fee. The administrative fee includes a shareholder return component and an incremental cost component. As discussed inItem 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis—Regulated Electric Business—Senate Bill 1 CreditsBusiness section, BGE is now requiredresumed collection of the shareholder return portion of the residential SOS administrative charge, which had been eliminated under Maryland Senate Bill 1, from June 1, 2008 through May 31, 2010 without having to creditrebate it to all residential electric customers. Starting June 1, 2010, BGE provides all residential electric customers a credit for the shareholderresidential return component of the administrative charge for residential SOS service.through December 2016.

        Bidding to supply BGE's market-based standard offer service will occurSOS occurs from time to time through a competitive bidding process approved by the Maryland PSC. Successful bidders, which may include subsidiaries of Constellation Energy, will execute contracts with BGE for varying terms.terms of three months or two years.

Commercial and Industrial Customers

BGE is obligated by the Maryland PSC to provide market-based standard offer serviceseveral variations of SOS to commercial and industrial customers for varying periods beyond June 30, 2004, depending on customer load.


8


Table of Contents

Residential Customers

Residential customers went to full market rates in January 2008. Pursuant to the order issued by the Maryland PSC in October 2009 approving our transaction with EDF, Constellation Energy agreed to fund a one-time per customer distribution rate credit for BGE residential customers, in 2010, totaling $110.5 million, which approximated $100 per customer. In August 2006,December 2009, BGE filed a tariff with the Maryland PSC stating we would give residential customers a rate credit of exactly $100 per customer. As a result, BGE provided rate credits totaling $112.4 million. Constellation Energy made a $66 million equity contribution to BGE in December 2009 to fund the after-tax amount of the rate credit as required by the Maryland PSC order.

        In 2010, the Maryland PSC issued ana rate order indefinitely extending the obligation of Maryland utilitiesauthorizing BGE to provide SOS service for those commercialincrease electric and industrial customers for which market-based standard offer service was scheduled to expire at the end of May 2007. The extended service will be provided on substantially the same terms as under the then existing service, except that wholesale biddinggas distribution rates for service to some customers will be conducted more frequently.

        BGE's obligation to provide market-based standard offer service to its largest commercial and industrial customers expiredrendered on May 31, 2005. BGE continues to provide an hourly-priced market-based standard offer service to those customers.


Residential Customers

As a result of the November 1999 Maryland PSC order regarding the deregulation of electric generation in Maryland, BGE's residential electric base rates were frozen until July 2006. Subsequent orders of the Maryland PSC specified that BGE would procure the power to serve residential customers beginning July 2006 via auctions to be conducted in late 2005 and early 2006. The procured power costs of these auctions would have resulted in an average electric residential customer bill increase of 72%. In June 2006, Senate Bill 1 was enacted, which, among other things:

        We further discuss the impacts of Senate Bill 1 and other recent legislation inItem 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis—Business Environment—Regulation—Maryland—Senate Bills 1 and 400 section.4, 2010. We discuss the market risk of our regulated electric businessthis rate order in more detail inItem 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis—Market RiskRegulation—Maryland—Base Rates section.

Electric Load Management

BGE has implemented various programs for use when system-operating conditions or market economics indicate that a reduction in load would be beneficial. These programs include:

        These programs generally take effect on summer days when demand and/or wholesale prices are relatively high and had the effect of reducing BGE's system peak load by 248 MW during the summer period in 2007.

BGE is also developing other programs designed to help BGE manage its peak demand, improve system reliability and improve service to customers by giving customers greater control over their energy use.

        Recently,        In August 2010, the Maryland PSC approved full implementationa comprehensive smart grid initiative for BGE which includes the planned installation of 2 million residential and commercial electric and gas smart meters at an expected total cost of approximately $480 million. Under a demand response program, which will enablegrant from the DOE, BGE is a recipient of $200 million in federal funding for our smart grid and other related initiatives. This grant allows BGE to regulate participating customer energy use throughbe reimbursed for smart grid and other related expenditures up to $200 million, substantially reducing the usetotal cost of programmable thermostats and air conditioner load control devices at customer premises during peak demand periods.these initiatives.

        The Maryland PSC also approved a full portfolio of conservation programs for implementation in 2009 as well as a customer surcharge to recover the implementation of an advanced metering pilot program, which will enable BGE to improve customer service and offer special pricing as an incentive to customers to reduce energy use during peak demand periods and to detect power outages electronically. BGE has also initiated a program that will provide incentives to customers to use energy efficient products and to take other actions to conserve energy. We also discuss the demand response initiatives inItem 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis—Regulation—Maryland—Maryland PSC section.associated costs.

Transmission and Distribution Facilities

BGE maintains approximately 250240 substations and approximately 1,300 circuit miles of transmission lines throughout central Maryland. BGE also maintains approximately 24,00024,800 circuit miles of distribution lines. The transmission facilities are connected to those of neighboring utility systems as part of PJM.PJM Interconnection (PJM). Under the PJM Tariff and various agreements, BGE and other market participants can use regional transmission facilities for energy, capacity, and ancillary services transactions, including emergency assistance.

        We discuss various FERC initiatives relating to wholesale electric markets in more detail inItem 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis—Federal Regulation section.


9


Table of Contents

BGE Electric Operating Statistics

 
 2007
 2006
 2005
 2004
 2003

Revenues(In millions)               
 Residential $1,514.9 $1,092.1 $1,066.6 $1,015.8 $959.0
 Commercial               
  Excluding Delivery Service Only  577.4  733.4  722.1  708.9  694.2
  Delivery Service Only  217.0  149.4  107.5  78.6  66.1
 Industrial               
  Excluding Delivery Service Only  31.6  46.8  52.8  92.3  137.0
  Delivery Service Only  27.8  26.2  28.0  21.3  18.2

 System Sales and Deliveries  2,368.7  2,047.9  1,977.0  1,916.9  1,874.5
 Other (A)  87.0  68.0  59.5  50.8  47.1

 Total $2,455.7 $2,115.9 $2,036.5 $1,967.7 $1,921.6

Distribution Volumes(In thousands)—MWH               
 Residential  13,365  12,886  13,762  13,313  12,754
 Commercial               
  Excluding Delivery Service Only  4,364  6,325  7,847  9,286  9,937
  Delivery Service Only  11,921  9,392  7,967  5,767  4,982
 Industrial               
  Excluding Delivery Service Only  287  467  614  1,429  2,556
  Delivery Service Only  3,175  2,988  3,122  2,562  1,780

 Total  33,112  32,058  33,312  32,357  32,009

Customers(In thousands)               
 Residential  1,103.1  1,093.3  1,084.1  1,072.1  1,061.7
 Commercial  116.7  115.5  114.7  113.6  112.1
 Industrial  5.5  5.2  5.0  4.8  4.9

 Total  1,225.3  1,214.0  1,203.8  1,190.5  1,178.7

 
 2010
 2009
 2008
 
  

Revenues(In millions)

          
 

Residential

          
  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 $1,808.6 $1,864.0 $1,688.3 
  

Delivery Service Only

  48.1  14.3  7.6 
 

Commercial

          
  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

  467.4  531.2  604.0 
  

Delivery Service Only

  249.5  245.0  222.8 
 

Industrial

          
  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

  28.7  30.4  31.3 
  

Delivery Service Only

  25.6  29.1  27.1 
  
 

System Sales and Deliveries

  2,627.9  2,714.0  2,581.1 
 

Other (1)

  124.4  106.7  98.6 
  
 

Total

 $2,752.3 $2,820.7 $2,679.7 
  

Distribution Volumes(In thousands)—MWH

          
 

Residential

          
  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

  12,344  12,394  12,670 
  

Delivery Service Only

  1,490  457  353 
 

Commercial

          
  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

  3,707  3,945  3,957 
  

Delivery Service Only

  12,537  11,753  11,739 
 

Industrial

          
  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

  267  270  242 
  

Delivery Service Only

  2,519  2,757  3,002 
  
 

Total

  32,864  31,576  31,963 
  

Customers(In thousands)

          
 

Residential

  1,114.7  1,111.9  1,108.5 
 

Commercial

  118.6  118.5  117.6 
 

Industrial

  5.5  5.3  5.3 
  
 

Total

  1,238.8  1,235.7  1,231.4 
  
(A)(1)
Primarily includes network integration transmission service revenues, late payment charges, miscellaneous service fees, and tower leasing revenues.

Operating statistics do not reflect the elimination of intercompany transactions.


"Delivery service only" refers to BGE's delivery of commodityelectricity that was purchased by the customer from an alternate supplier.


10


Table of Contents

Gas Business

The wholesale price of natural gas as a commodity is not subject to regulation. All BGE gas customers have the option to purchase gas from alternative suppliers, including subsidiaries of Constellation Energy. BGE continues to deliver gas to all customers within its service territory. This delivery service is regulated by the Maryland PSC.

        BGE also provides customers with meter reading, billing, emergency response, regular maintenance, and balancing services.

        Approximately 50% of the gas delivered on BGE's distribution system is for customers that purchase gas from alternative suppliers. These customers are charged fees to recover the costs BGE incurs to deliver the customers' gas through our distribution system.

        In December 2005, the Maryland PSC issued an order granting BGE a $35.6 million annual increase in its gas baseA market-based rates which are the rates the Maryland PSC allows BGEincentive mechanism applies to charge its customers for the cost of providing them delivery service plus a profit. In December 2006, the Baltimore City Circuit Court upheld the rate order. However, certain parties have filed an appeal with the Court of Special Appeals. We cannot provide assurance that the Maryland PSC's order will not be reversed in whole or in part or that certain issues will not be remanded to the Maryland PSC for reconsideration.

        For customers that buy their gas from BGE, there is a market-based rates incentive mechanism.BGE. Under this market-based rates incentive mechanism, ourBGE's actual cost of gas is compared to a market index (a measure of the market price of gas in a given period). The difference between ourBGE's actual cost and the market index is shared equally between shareholders and customers.

        BGE must secure fixed-price contracts for at least 10%, but not more than 20%, of forecasted system supply requirements for flowing (i.e., non-storage) gas for the November through March period. These fixed-price contracts are not subject to sharing under the market-based rates incentive mechanism.

        BGE purchases themeets its natural gas it resells to customers directly from many producers and marketers. BGE hasload requirements through firm pipeline transportation and storage agreements that expire from 2008 to 2027.entitlements.

        BGE's current pipeline firm transportation entitlements to serve BGE'sits firm loads are 338,053 dekatherms (DTH)DTH per day.

        BGE's current maximum storage entitlements are 248,153297,091 DTH per day. To supplement its gas supply at times of heavy winter demands and to be available in temporary emergencies affecting gas supply, BGE has:

        BGE has under contract sufficient volumes of propane for the operation of the propane air facility and is capable of liquefying sufficient volumes of natural gas during the summer months for operations of its liquefied natural gas facility during peak winter periods.

        BGE historically has been able to arrange short-term contracts or exchange agreements with other gas companies in the event of short-term disruptions to gas supplies or to meet additional demand.

        BGE also participates in the interstate markets by releasing pipeline capacity or bundling pipeline capacity with gas for off-system sales. Off-system gas sales are low-margin direct sales of gas to wholesale suppliers of natural gas. Earnings from these activities are shared between shareholders and customers. BGE makes these sales as part of a program to balance ourits supply of, and cost of, natural gas.


11


Table of Contents

BGE Gas Operating Statistics

 
 2007
 2006
 2005
 2004
 2003

Revenues(In millions)               
 Residential               
  Excluding Delivery Service Only $552.0 $490.2 $558.5 $478.0 $444.5
  Delivery Service Only  19.0  20.6  23.2  14.2  13.6
 Commercial               
  Excluding Delivery Service Only  154.1  148.9  174.4  135.4  128.6
  Delivery Service Only  41.2  35.9  31.9  28.0  24.6
 Industrial               
  Excluding Delivery Service Only  7.8  7.5  10.5  9.4  11.5
  Delivery Service Only  22.1  19.3  12.4  7.8  11.4

 System Sales and Deliveries  796.2  722.4  810.9  672.8  634.2
 Off-System Sales  157.4  168.6  154.7  77.2  84.8
 Other  9.2  8.5  7.2  7.0  7.0

 Total $962.8 $899.5 $972.8 $757.0 $726.0

Distribution Volumes(In thousands)—DTH               
 Residential               
  Excluding Delivery Service Only  39,199  33,019  39,107  39,080  40,894
  Delivery Service Only  4,310  3,948  5,423  6,053  6,640
 Commercial               
  Excluding Delivery Service Only  12,464  11,683  14,133  13,248  13,895
  Delivery Service Only  30,367  25,695  28,993  34,120  29,138
 Industrial               
  Excluding Delivery Service Only  658  604  921  865  1,143
  Delivery Service Only  17,897  20,325  19,357  14,310  18,399

 System Sales and Deliveries  104,895  95,274  107,934  107,676  110,109
 Off-System Sales  19,963  19,738  17,209  9,914  12,859

 Total  124,858  115,012  125,143  117,590  122,968

Customers(In thousands)               
 Residential  602.3  597.1  590.9  582.0  575.2
 Commercial  42.7  42.3  42.0  41.6  41.1
 Industrial  1.2  1.2  1.2  1.2  1.2

 Total  646.2  640.6  634.1  624.8  617.5

 
 2010
 2009
 2008
 
  

Revenues(In millions)

          
 

Residential

          
  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

 $427.0 $460.7 $567.8 
  

Delivery Service Only

  22.1  19.0  19.0 
 

Commercial

          
  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

  109.0  129.1  161.8 
  

Delivery Service Only

  39.8  40.4  46.4 
 

Industrial

          
  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

  5.2  6.4  8.1 
  

Delivery Service Only

  16.7  15.2  14.5 
  
 

System Sales and Deliveries

  619.8  670.8  817.6 
 

Off-System Sales

  79.8  81.1  197.7 
 

Other

  9.8  6.4  8.7 
  
 

Total

 $709.4 $758.3 $1,024.0 
  

Distribution Volumes(In thousands)—DTH

          
 

Residential

          
  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

  37,791  37,889  37,675 
  

Delivery Service Only

  4,857  4,270  4,119 
 

Commercial

          
  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

  11,606  12,066  12,205 
  

Delivery Service Only

  24,329  25,046  29,289 
 

Industrial

          
  

Excluding Delivery Service Only

  595  635  650 
  

Delivery Service Only

  19,750  20,826  18,432 
  
 

System Sales and Deliveries

  98,928  100,732  102,370 
 

Off-System Sales

  14,711  17,542  18,782 
  
 

Total

  113,639  118,274  121,152 
  

Customers(In thousands)

          
 

Residential

  608.6  606.8  605.0 
 

Commercial

  42.9  42.9  42.8 
 

Industrial

  1.1  1.1  1.1 
  
 

Total

  652.6  650.8  648.9 
  

Operating statistics do not reflect the elimination of intercompany transactions.


"Delivery service only" refers to BGE's delivery of commoditygas that was purchased by the customer from an alternate supplier.


Franchises

BGE has nonexclusive electric and gas franchises to use streets and other highways that are adequate and sufficient to permit it to engage in its present business. Conditions of the franchises are satisfactory.

Other Nonregulated Businesses

Energy Projects and Services

We offer energy projects and services designed primarily to provide energy solutions to large commercial, industrial and governmental customers. These energy products and services include:

Home Products and Gas Retail Marketing

We offer services to customers in Maryland including:

Consolidated Capital Requirements

Our total capital requirements for 20072010 were $1,665 million.$1.0 billion. Of this amount, $1,263 million$0.4 billion was used in our nonregulatedGeneration and NewEnergy businesses and $402 million$0.6 billion was used in our regulated business. We estimate our total capital requirements will be $2.5$1.0 billion in 2008.2011.

        We continuously review and change our capital expenditure programs, so actual expenditures may vary from the estimate above. We discuss our capital requirements further inItem 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis—Capital Resources section.


Environmental Matters

The development (involving site selection, environmental assessments, and permitting), construction, acquisition, and operation of electric generating and distribution facilities are subject to extensive federal, state, and local environmental and land use laws and regulations. From the beginning phases of development to the ongoing operation of existing or new electric generating and distribution facilities, our activities involve compliance with diverse laws and regulations that address emissions and impacts to air and water, protection of natural and cultural resources, and chemical and waste handling and disposal.


12


Table of Contents

        We continuously monitor federal, state, and local environmental initiatives to determine potential impacts on our financial results. As new laws or regulations are promulgated, we assess their applicability and implement the necessary modifications to our facilities or their operation to maintain ongoing compliance. Our capital expenditures were approximately $190 million$1.2 billion during the five-year period 2003-20072006-2010 to comply with existing environmental standards and regulations.regulations, including the Maryland HAA. Our estimated environmental capital requirements for the next three years are approximately $575$35 million in 2008, $3902011, $20 million in 2009,2012, and $30$25 million in 2010.2013.

Air Quality

Federal

The Clean Air Act (CAA) created the basic framework for the federal and state regulation of air pollution.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)


The NAAQS are federal air quality standards authorized under the Clean Air ActCAA that establish maximum ambient air concentrations for the following specific pollutants: ozone (smog), carbon monoxide, lead, particulates, sulfur dioxides (SOSO2), and nitrogen dioxides (NO2).dioxide.

        In order for states to achieve compliance with the NAAQS, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) adopted the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) in March 2005 to further reduce ozone and fine particulate pollution by addressing the interstate transport of SO2 and nitrogen oxide (NONOx) emissions from fossil fuel-fired generating facilities located primarily in the Eastern United States.

        In December 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed its July 2008 decision to fully vacate CAIR, and instead, remanded the issue to the EPA for reconsideration with CAIR requirements to remain in effect until the EPA takes further action. The uncertainty around the adoption of CAIR has not resulted in a material change to our emissions reduction plan in Maryland as the emissions reduction requirements of Maryland's HAA and Clean Power Rule (CPR) are more stringent and applied sooner than those under CAIR. However, as CAIR is replaced, it could affect the market prices of SO2 and NOx emission allowances, which could in turn affect our financial results.

        In July 2010, the EPA proposed regulations to replace the regional cap-and-trade program under CAIR with a program that would require each of 31 eastern states and the District of Columbia to reduce SO2 and NOX emissions. Depending on the scope of any final regulations that may be adopted by the EPA, which is expected to occur in July 2011, and any plans that may be adopted by the states in which our plants are located, additional regulation could result in additional compliance requirements and costs that could be material.

        In January 2010, the EPA proposed rules to adopt NAAQS for ozone that are stricter than the NAAQS adopted in March 2008, based on the EPA's reevaluation of scientific evidence about ozone and ozone's effects on humans and the environment. The final standard is expected to be adopted in 2011. In June 2010, the EPA adopted a stricter NAAQS for SO2. We are unable to determine the impact that complying with the stricter NAAQS for ozone or SO2 will have on our financial results until the states in which our generating facilities are located adopt plans to meet the new standards. However, costs associated with compliance with these plans could be material.

        In December 2006, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that a requirementrequirements to impose fees on large emissions sources in areas that have not attained the NAAQS based on the previous ozone standard (Section 185 fees), which had been rescinded by the EPA in May 2005, remained applicable retroactive to November 2005 and remanded the issue to the EPA for reconsideration. A petition to the United States Supreme Court to hear an appeal was denied in January 2008. The EPA has announced that it intends to propose regulations by the summer of 2008 to address howissued Section 185 fees will be handled. In addition,fee guidance to the exact method of computing these fees has not been established and will dependstates in part onJanuary 2010 that contained flexible state implementation regulations thatalternatives to meet the requirements. States in which we operate have not been proposed. Consequently,finalized their approach for implementing the requirements and consequently, we are unable to estimate the ultimate financial impact of this matter in light of the uncertainty surrounding the anticipated EPA and state rulemakings. However, the final resolution of this matter, and any fees that are ultimately assessed could have a material impact on our financial results.


        In September 2006, the EPA adopted a stricter NAAQS for particulate matter. We are unable to determine the impact that complying with the stricter NAAQS for particulate matter will have on our financial results until the states in which our generating facilities are located adopt plans to meet the new standard.

Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions

In March 2005, the EPA finalized the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) to reduce the emissions of mercury from coal-fired facilities through a market-based cap and trade program. CAMR was to affect all coal or waste coal fired boilers at our generating facilities. However, in February 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit struck down CAMR. At this time, we cannot predict what actionsIn response to that decision and as a result of a court settlement with a number of parties, the EPA will take in responseis under a consent order to the court's decision. However, any actionpropose a rule by March 2011 and to finalize new hazardous air pollutant emission standards by November 2011. Any new standards that requiresrequire the installation of additional emissions control technology beyond what is required under Maryland's Healthy Air ActHAA and Clean Power Rule,CPR, which are discussed


13


Table of Contents

below, may require us to incur additional costs, which could have a material effect on our financial results.

New Source Review

In connection with its enforcement of the Clean Air Act'sCAA's new source review requirements, in 2000, the EPA requested information relating to modifications made to our Brandon Shores, C.P. Crane, and H. A. Wagner plants located in Maryland. The EPA also sent similar, but narrower, information requests to Keystone and Conemaugh, two of our newer Pennsylvania waste-coalcoal burning plants in which we have an ownership interest. We responded to the EPA in 2001, and as of the date of this report the EPA has taken no further action.

        As discussed inNote 12 to Consolidated Financial Statements, in January 2009, the EPA issued a Notice of Violation to one of our subsidiaries alleging that the Keystone plant located in Pennsylvania, of which we own a 20.99% interest, performed various capital projects without complying with the new source review requirements.

        Based on the level of emissions control that the EPA and states are seeking in these new source review enforcement actions, we believe that material additional costs and penalties could be incurred, and planned capital expenditures could be accelerated, if the EPA was successful in any future actions regarding our facilities.

State

Maryland has adopted the Healthy Air Act (HAA)HAA and the Clean Power Rule (CPR),CPR, which establish annual SO2, NOx, and mercury emission caps for specific coal-fired units in Maryland, including units located at three of our facilities. The requirements of the HAA and the CPR for SO2, NOx, and mercury emissions are more stringent and apply sooner than those required under CAIR.federal requirements. Likewise, Massachusetts has comprehensive air emissions standards in place that are more stringent than the federal standards, so impending regulations are not anticipated to cause additional costs to our natural gas and oil-fired units in Massachusetts. In addition, Pennsylvania, hasregulations adopted regulations requiring coal-fired generating facilities located in Pennsylvania to reduce mercury emissions.emissions were ruled invalid by a Pennsylvania court in January 2009.

        Several other states        Maryland has also adopted opacity regulations consistent with its commitment to resolve long-standing industry concerns about the prior regulations' continuous compliance requirements and is in the northeastern U.S. continueprocess of obtaining the EPA's approval of Maryland's state implementation plan (SIP) for these regulations. While EPA approval of Maryland's SIP is being obtained, the opacity regulations are being implemented in a manner that will enable our plants to consider more stringent and earlier SO2, NOx, and mercury emissions reductions than those requiredremain in compliance. We anticipate that the regulations under CAIR or what would have been required under CAMR.the EPA-approved SIP will be consistent with the regulations as currently implemented.

Capital Expenditure EstimatesEstimates—Air Quality

We expect to incur additional environmental capital spending as a result of complying with the air quality laws and regulations discussed above. To comply with CAIR, HAA and CPR, we will install additional air emission control equipment at our coal-fired generating facilities in Maryland and at our co-owned coal-fired facilities in Pennsylvania to meet air quality standards. We include in our estimated environmental capital requirements capital spending for these air quality projects, which we expect will be approximately $550$20 million in 2008, $350 million in 2009,2011, $15 million in 20102012, $25 million in 2013 and $25 million from 2011-2012.2014-2015.

        Our estimates are subject to significant uncertainties including the timing of any additional federal and/or state regulations or legislation, such as any regulations adopted by the EPA in response to the court decision striking down CAMR, the implementation timetables for such regulation or legislation, and the specific amount of emissions reductions that will be required at our facilities. As a result, we cannot predict our capital spending or the scope or timing of these projects with certainty, and the actual expenditures, scope, and timing could differ significantly from our estimates.

        We believe that the additional air emission control equipment we plan to install will meet the emission reduction requirements under CAIR, HAA and CPR. If additional emission reductions still are required, we will assess our various compliance alternatives and their related costs, and although we cannot yet estimate the additional costs we may incur, such costs could be material.

Global Climate Change

AlthoughIn response to the anticipated challenges of global climate change, we believe it is imperative to slow, stop and reverse the growth in greenhouse gas emissions. Climate change could pose physical risks, such as more frequent or more extreme weather events, that could affect our systems and operations; however, uncertainty remains as to the timing and extent of any direct, climate-related impacts to our systems and operations. Extreme weather can affect the supply of and demand for electricity, natural gas and fuels and these changes may impact the price of energy commodities in both the spot market and the forward market, which may affect our financial results. In addition, extreme weather typically increases demand for electricity and gas from BGE's customers.

        There is continued likelihood that greenhouse gas emissions regulation will eventually occur at the international or federal level and/or continue to occur at the state level although considerable uncertainty remains as to the nature and timing of such regulation. Climate-related legislation was introduced in the last several United States Congress sessions but was not enacted. In September 2009, the EPA issued an "endangerment and


14


Table of Contents

cause or contribute finding" for greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act and in 2010 finalized changes to its air construction and operating permit programs to incorporate greenhouse gases as pollutants subject to air permits. Beginning in 2011, in certain instances, additional greenhouse gas emissions regulation, thereresulting from the construction or modification of large facilities subject to the EPA's permit programs, which include power plants, will be required to be controlled through the use of the best available control technology, as determined by the EPA, before an air emissions permit will be issued. If we were to modify our generating plants, our costs to comply with these requirements could be material depending on the modifications made.

        Maryland and Massachusetts are participants in the Northeast Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). Under RGGI, the states auction carbon dioxide (CO2) allowances associated with power plants, which include plants owned by us. Auctions have occurred quarterly since September 2008. Although we did not incur material costs in these auctions, we could incur material costs in the future to purchase allowances necessary to offset CO2 emissions from our plants. Although we participate in RGGI, we believe a patchwork of climate policy and regulatory approaches across different states, regions or industry sectors has the potential to inequitably raise costs to particular businesses and/or drive the reallocation of emissions without actually achieving the desired overall reduction of emissions.

        In addition, California has adopted regulations requiring our generating facilities in California to submit greenhouse gas emissions data to the state. More recently, in December 2010, the California Air Resources Board approved a declining cap and trade program for electricity suppliers beginning in 2012 aimed at achieving a 15% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2020 as compared with 2012. It is an increasing likelihood that such regulation will occur atnot possible to determine the scope of the impact of this program on our business or financial results until the details of the program are made public, but the impact could be material.

        We continue to monitor international developments and proposed federal and/orand state level.legislation and regulations and evaluate the potential impact on our operations. In the event that additional greenhouse gas emissions reduction legislation or regulations are enacted, we will assess our various compliance alternatives, which may include installation of additional environmental controls, modification of operating schedules or the closure of one or more of our coal-fired generating facilities. Anyfacilities, and our compliance costs we incur could have a material impact on our financial results.be material.

        However, to the extent greenhouse gas emissions are regulated through a federal, mandatory cap and trade greenhouse gas emissions program, we believe our business could also benefit. Our generation fleet currently has a carbon dioxide (COan overall CO2) emission rate that is lower than the industry average with more than 60%a substantial amount of the fleet's output coming from low carbon dioxide emitting nuclear and hydroelectric plants, which generate significantly lower CO2 emissions than fossil fuel plants. Our global commodities business hasWe also have experience trading in the markets for emissions allowances and renewable energy credits.


        In accordance with HAA requirements, Maryland became a full participantcredits and our NewEnergy business has expertise in the Northeast Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) in April 2007. In October 2007, under RGGI, the Maryland Department of the Environment proposed auctioning 90% of CO2 allowances associated with Maryland's power plants, which include plants owned by us. If this proposal is enacted, we could incur material costsproviding renewable energy products and services to purchase CO2 allowances necessary to offset emissions from our plants.

        In addition, California has adopted regulations requiring our generating facilities in California to submit greenhouse gas emissions data to the state, which the state intends to use to develop a plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

        We continue to evaluate the potential impact of the HAA and California CO2 emissions requirements and RGGI participation on our financial results; however, our compliance costs could be material.retail customers.

Water Quality

The Clean Water Act established the basic framework for federal and state regulation of water pollution control and requires facilities that discharge waste or storm water into the waters of the United States to obtain permits.

Water Intake Regulations

The Clean Water Act requires cooling water intake structures to reflect the best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impacts. In July 2004, the EPA published final rules under the Clean Water Act for existing facilities that establish performance standards for meeting the best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impacts. We currently have sixeight facilities affected by the regulation. In January 2007, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that the EPA's rule did not properly implement the Clean Water Act requirements in a number of areas and remanded the rule to the EPA for reconsideration.

        In response to this ruling, in July 2007, the EPA suspended the second phase of the regulations pending further rulemaking and directed the permitting authorities to establish controls for cooling water intake structures that reflect the best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impacts. In November 2007, a number of parties petitionedDecember 2008, the United States Supreme Court to hearheard an appeal of the Second Circuit's decision.decision relating to the application of cost-benefit analysis to best technology available decisions and ruled in April 2009 that the EPA has a right to consider cost-benefit analysis in such decisions.

        A decision by the United States Supreme Court on whether to hear the case is not expected until mid to late 2008. In addition, theThe EPA is expected to propose new regulations by the end of 2008. During this period,in March 2011 and we will continue to evaluate our compliance options in light of those proposed regulations. Until the Second Circuit decision andnew regulations are finalized, which is expected in July 2012, water intake compliance will be determined in accordance with the EPA's July 2007 order.order and relevant state regulations and interpretations. Depending on the scope of any new regulations that may be adopted by the EPA, our compliance costs could be material.

        In March 2010, the New York Department of Environmental Conservation issued a draft policy designating closed-cycle cooling as the best technology available for cooling water intake structures for minimizing adverse environmental impacts. At this time we cannot estimatepredict whether this policy will be adopted. However, if the policy is adopted and CENG is


15


Table of Contents

required to retrofit its two nuclear generating facilities in New York to implement this technology, our share of the compliance costs but they could be material.

Hazardous and Solid Waste

We discuss proceedings relating to compliance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act inNote 12 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Our coal-fired generating facilities produce approximately two and a half million tons of combustion by-products ("ash") each year. The EPA announced in 2007 its intention to develop national standards to regulate this material as a non-hazardous waste, and has been developing or considering regulations governing the placement of ash in landfills, surface impoundments, sand/gravel surface mines and coal mines. In 2009, following the Tennessee Valley Authority ash release, the EPA announced it is considering regulating ash as a hazardous waste. Depending on its final scope, additional federal regulation has the potential to result in additional compliance requirements and costs that could be material. In addition, the Maryland Department of the Environment proposed revisedfinalized regulations governing the disposal, storage, use and placement of ash in December 2007. Final rules are expected in June 2008. Federal and state regulation has the potential to result in additional requirements. Depending on the scope of any final requirements, our compliance costs could be material.

        As a result of these regulatory proposals and our current ash generation projections, we are exploring our options for the management of ash, including construction of an ash placement facility. Over the next five years, we estimate that our capital expenditures for this project will be approximately $75$20 million. Our estimates are subject to significant uncertainties, including the timing of any regulatory change, its implementation timetable, and the scope of the final requirements. As a result, we cannot predict our capital spending or the scope and timing of this project with certainty, and the actual expenditures, scope and timing could differ significantly from our estimates.

        In May 2010, the EPA proposed rules to regulate coal combustion by-products, such as fly ash, either as a special hazardous waste or as a nonhazardous waste. Depending on the scope of any final rules that are adopted, additional federal regulation has the potential to result in additional compliance requirements and costs that could be material.


Employees

Constellation Energy and its consolidated subsidiaries (excluding CENG, which was deconsolidated on November 6, 2009) had approximately 10,2007,600 employees at December 31, 2007. At the Nine Mile Point facility, approximately 510 employees are represented by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 97. The labor contract with this union expires in June 2011. We believe that our relationship with this union is satisfactory, but there can be no assurances that this will continue to be the case.


2010.


Available Information

Constellation Energy maintains a website at constellation.com where copies of our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and any amendments may be obtained free of charge. These reports are posted on our website the same day they are filed with the SEC. The SEC maintains a website (sec.gov), where copies of our filings may be obtained free of charge. The website address for BGE is bge.com. These website addresses are inactive textual references, and the contents of these websites are not part of this Form 10-K.

        In addition, the website for Constellation Energy includes copies of our Corporate Governance Guidelines, Principles of Business Integrity, Corporate Compliance Program, Insider Trading Policy, Policy and Procedures with respect to Related Person Transactions, Information Disclosure Policy, and the charters of the Audit, Compensation and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees of the Board of Directors. Copies of each of these documents may be printed from our website or may be obtained from Constellation Energy upon written request to the Corporate Secretary.

        The Principles of Business Integrity is a code of ethics that applies to all of our directors, officers, and employees, including the chief executive officer, chief financial officer, and chief accounting officer. We will post any amendments to, or waivers from, the Principles of Business Integrity applicable to our chief executive officer, chief financial officer, or chief accounting officer on our website.


Item 1A. Risk Factors

You should consider carefully the following risks, along with the other information contained in this Form 10-K. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones that may affect us. Additional risks and uncertainties also may adversely affect our business and operations including those discussed in Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis. If any of the following events actually occur, our business and financial results could be materially adversely affected.

Economic conditions and instability in the financial markets could negatively impact our business.

Our operations are affected by local, national, and worldwide economic conditions. The consequences of a slow recovery from recession or a new recession may include a lower level of economic activity and uncertainty regarding energy prices and the capital and commodity markets. A lower level of economic activity may continue to result in a decline in energy consumption, an increase in customers' inability to pay their accounts, and lower commodity prices. These impacts may adversely affect our financial results and future growth.


16


Table of Contents

        Instability in the financial markets, as a result of recession or otherwise, may affect the cost of capital and our ability to raise capital. We rely on the capital and banking markets, as well as the periodic use of commercial paper to the extent available, to meet our financial commitments and short-term liquidity needs if internal funds are not available from our operations. We also use letters of credit issued under our credit facilities to support our operations. Disruptions in the capital and credit markets as a result of uncertainty, reduced alternatives, or failures of significant financial institutions could adversely affect our access to liquidity needed for our businesses, including our ability to secure credit facilities and refinance debt that comes due, and our ability to complete other alternatives we are exploring. In addition, such disruptions could adversely affect our ability to draw on our credit facilities. Our access to funds under those credit facilities is dependent on the ability of the banks that are parties to the facilities to meet their funding commitments. Those banks may not be able to meet their funding commitments to us if they experience shortages of capital and liquidity or if they experience excessive volumes of borrowing requests from borrowers within a short period of time. The disruptions in capital and credit markets may also result in higher interest rates on publicly issued debt securities and increased costs associated with commercial paper borrowing and under bank credit facilities.

        Any disruptions could require us to take measures to conserve cash until the markets stabilize or until alternative credit arrangements or other funding for our business needs can be arranged. Such measures could include deferring capital expenditures, further changing our strategies to reduce collateral-posting requirements, and reducing or eliminating future dividend payments or other discretionary uses of cash. The inability to obtain the liquidity needed to meet our business requirements, or to obtain such liquidity on terms that are favorable to us, would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. If entities with which we do business are unable to raise capital or access the credit markets, they may be unable to perform their obligations or make payments under agreements we have with them. Defaults by these entities may have an adverse effect on our financial results.

Our merchant energyNewEnergy business may incur substantial costs and liabilities and be exposed to price volatility and counterparty performance risk as a result of its participation in the wholesale energy markets.

We purchase and sell power and fuel in markets exposed to significant risks, including price volatility for electricity and fuel and the credit risks of counterparties with which we enter into contracts.

        We use various hedging strategies in an effort to mitigate many of these risks. However, hedging transactions do not guard against all risks and are not always effective, as they are based upon predictions about future market conditions. The inability or failure to effectively hedge assets or fuel or power positions against changes in commodity prices, interest rates, counterparty credit risk or other risk measures could significantly impair our future financial results.

        Exposure to electricity price volatility.    We buy and sell electricity in both the wholesale bilateral markets and spot markets, which expose us to the risks of rising and falling prices in those markets, and our cash flows may vary accordingly. At any given time, the wholesale spot market price of electricity for each hour is generally determined by the cost of supplying the next unit of electricity to the market during that hour. This is highly dependent on the regional generation market. In many cases, the next unit of electricity supplied would be supplied from generating stations fueled by fossil fuels, primarily coal, natural gas and oil. Consequently, the open market wholesale price of electricity may reflect the cost of coal, natural gas or oil plus the cost to convert the fuel to electricity and an appropriate return on capital. Therefore, changes in the supply and cost of coal, natural gas and oil may impact the open market wholesale price of electricity.

        A portion of our power generation facilities operates wholly or partially without long-term power purchase agreements. As a result, power from these facilities is sold on the spot market or on a short-term contractual basis, which if not fully hedged may affect the volatility of our financial results.

        Exposure to fuel cost volatility.    Currently, our power generation facilities purchase a portion of their fuel through short-term contracts or on the spot market. Fuel prices can be volatile, and the price that can be obtained for power produced from such fuel may not change at the same rate as fuel costs. In addition, new sources of natural gas supplies from domestic shale production, as well as rising liquid natural gas (LNG) exports, could increase the long-term supply of natural gas and create a fundamental and long-lasting decline in natural gas prices. Lower natural gas prices could contribute to a decline in power generation prices that could have an adverse effect on our financial results and cash flows. As a result, fuel price increaseschanges may adversely affect our financial results.

        Exposure to counterparty performance.    Our merchant energyNewEnergy business enters into transactions with numerous third parties (commonly referred to as "counterparties"). In these arrangements, we are exposed to the credit risks of our counterparties and the risk that one or more counterparties may fail to perform under their obligations to make payments or deliver fuel or power. In addition, we enter into various wholesale transactions through Independent System Operators (ISOs). These ISOs are exposed to counterparty credit


17


Table of Contents

risks. Any losses relating to counterparty defaults impacting the ISOs are allocated to and borne by all other market participants in the ISO. These risks are enhancedexacerbated during periods of commodity price fluctuations. If a counterparty were to default and we were to liquidate all contracts with that entity, our credit loss would include the loss in value of derivative contracts recorded at fair value, the amount owed for settled transactions, and additional payments, if any, that we would have to make to settle unrealized losses on accrual contracts. Defaults by suppliers and other counterparties may adversely affect our financial results.

Changes in the prices of commodities, initial margin requirements, collateral posting asymmetries and types of collateral impact our liquidity requirements.

Our businesses are exposed to market fluctuations in the price and transportation costs of electricity, natural gas, coal, and other commodities. We seek to mitigate the effect of these fluctuations through various hedging strategies, which may require the posting of collateral by both us and our counterparties. Changes in the prices of commodities and initial margin requirements for exchange-traded contracts can affect the amount of collateral that must be posted, depending on the particular position we hold.

        There are certain asymmetries relating to the use of collateral that create liquidity requirements for our Generation and NewEnergy businesses. These asymmetries arise as a result of our actions to be economically hedged as well as market conditions or conventions for conducting business that result in some transactions being collateralized while others are not, including:

        As a result, significant changes in the prices of commodities and margin requirements for exchange-traded contracts could require us to post additional collateral from time to time without our counterparties having to post cash collateral to us, which could adversely affect our overall liquidity and ability to finance our operations, and, in turn, could adversely affect our credit ratings. Additionally, posting letters of credit to counterparties to meet collateral requirements adversely impacts our liquidity, while the receipt of letters of credit as collateral does not improve our liquidity.

Reduced liquidity in the markets in which we operate could impair our ability to appropriately manage the risks of our operations.

We are an active participant in energy markets through our competitive energy businesses. The liquidity of regional energy markets is an important factor in our ability to manage risks in these operations. Over the past several years, market participants in the merchant energy business have ended or significantly reduced their activities as a result of several factors, including government investigations, changes in market design, and deteriorating credit quality. As a result, several regional energy markets experienced a significant decline in liquidity, which, in turn, has impacted our ability to enter into certain types of transactions to manage our risks for settlement periods beyond 18 to 24 months. Liquidity in the energy markets can be adversely affected by various factors, including price volatility and the availability of credit. As a result, future reductions in liquidity may restrict our ability to manage our risks and this could impact our financial results.

We often rely on single suppliers and at times on single customers, exposing us to significant financial risks if either should fail to perform their obligations.

We often rely on a single supplier for the provision of fuel, water, and other services required for operation of a facility, and at times, we rely on a single customer or a few customers to purchase all or a significant portion of a facility's output, in some cases under long-term agreements that provide the support for any project debt used to finance the facility. The failure of any one customer or supplier to fulfill its contractual obligations could negatively impact our financial results.

We may not fully hedge our Generation and NewEnergy businesses, or other market positions against changes in commodity prices, and our hedging procedures may not work as planned.

To lower our financial exposure related to commodity price fluctuations, we routinely enter into contracts to hedge a portion of our purchase and sale commitments, weather positions, fuel requirements, inventories of natural gas, coal and other commodities, and competitive supply obligations. As part of this strategy, we routinely utilize fixed-price forward physical purchase and sales contracts, futures, financial swaps, and option contracts traded in the over-the-counter markets or on exchanges. However, we may not cover the entire exposure of our assets or positions to market price volatility, and the coverage will vary over time. Fluctuating commodity prices may negatively impact our financial results to the extent we have unhedged positions.

        In addition, risk management tools and metrics such as economic value at risk, daily value at risk, and stress testing are based on historical price movements. If price movements significantly or persistently deviate


18


Table of Contents

from historical behavior, risk limits may not fully protect us from significant losses.

        Our risk management policies and procedures may not always work as planned. As a result of these and other factors, we cannot predict with precision the impact that risk management decisions may have on our financial results.

The use of derivative and nonderivative contracts in the normal course of business could result in financial losses that negatively impact our financial results.

We use derivative instruments such as swaps, options, futures and forwards, as well as nonderivative contracts, to manage our commodity and financial market risks and to engage in trading activities. We could recognize financial losses as a result of volatility in the market values of these contracts or if a counterparty fails to perform.

        In the absence of actively quoted market prices and pricing information from external sources, the valuation of derivative instruments involves management's judgment or use of estimates. As a result, changes in the underlying assumptions or use of alternative valuation methods could affect the reported fair value of these contracts.

        Additionally, the settlement of derivative instruments could reflect a realized value that differs from our reported estimates of fair value.

Inaccurate assumptions and estimates in the models we use could adversely impact our financial results.

We deploy many models to value merchant contracts, derivatives and assets, to dispatch power from our generation plants, and to measure the risks and costs of various transactions and businesses. Also, a significant portion of our business relies on the assumptions underlying the forecasting of customer load, correlations between prices of energy commodities and weather and the creditworthiness of our customers and other third parties. Inaccurate estimates of various business assumptions used in those models could create the mispricing of customer contracts and assets or the incorrect measurement of key risks relating to our portfolios and businesses that could adversely impact our financial results.

Poor market performance will affect our pension plan investments, which may adversely affect our liquidity and financial results.

At December 31, 2010, our qualified pension obligation was approximately $129 million greater than the fair value of our plan assets. The performance of the capital markets will affect the value of the assets that are held in trust to satisfy our future obligations under our qualified pension plans. A decline in the market value of those assets or the failure of those assets to earn an adequate return may increase our funding requirements for these obligations, which may adversely affect our liquidity and financial results.

The operation of power generation facilities, including nuclear facilities involves significant risks that could adversely affect our financial results.

We own, operate and operatehave ownership interests in a number of power generation facilities. The operation of power generation facilities involves many risks, including start upstart-up risks, breakdown or failure of equipment, transmission lines, substations or pipelines, use of new technology, the dependence on a specific fuel source, including the transportation of fuel, or the impact of unusual or adverse weather conditions (including natural disasters such as hurricanes) or environmental compliance, as well as the risk of performance below expected or contracted levels of output or efficiency. This could result in lost revenues and/or increased expenses. Insurance, warranties, or performance guarantees may not cover any or all of the lost revenues or increased expenses, including the cost of replacement power. A portion of our generation facilities were constructed many years ago. Older generating equipment may require significant capital expenditures to keep it operating at peak efficiency. This equipment is also likely to require periodic upgrading and improvement. Breakdown or failure of one of our operating facilities may prevent the facility from performing under applicable power sales agreements which, in certain situations, could result in termination of the agreement or incurring a liability for liquidated damages.

Our Generation business may incur substantial costs and liabilities due to our ownership interest in nuclear generating facilities.

We indirectly own substantial interests in nuclear power plants. Operation of these plants exposes us to risks in addition to those that result from owning and operating non-nuclear power generation facilities. These risks include normal operating risks for a nuclear facility and the risks of a nuclear accident.

        Nuclear Operating Risks.    The operation of nuclear generating facilities involves routine operating risks, including:

    mechanical or structural problems;
    inadequacy or lapses in maintenance protocols;
    impairment of reactor operation and safety systems due to human or mechanical error;
    costs of storage, handling and disposal of nuclear materials, including the availability or unavailability of a permanent repository for spent nuclear fuel;
    regulatory actions, including shut down of units because of public safety concerns, whether at our plants or other nuclear operators;
    limitations on the amounts and types of insurance coverage commercially available;


19


Table of Contents

        Nuclear Accident Risks.    In the event of a nuclear accident, the cost of property damage and other expenses incurred may exceed the insurance coverage available from both private sources and an industry retrospective payment plan. In addition, in the event of an accident at our nuclear joint venture or another participating insured party's nuclear plants, we or CENG could be assessed retrospective insurance premiums (because all nuclear plant operators contribute to a nationwide catastrophic insurance fund). In instances where CENG is the member insured, we have guaranteed our share of CENG's performance. Uninsured losses or the payment of retrospective insurance premiums could each have a material adverse effect on our financial results.

We are subject to numerous environmental laws and regulations that require capital expenditures, increase our cost of operations and may expose us to environmental liabilities.

We are subject to extensive federal, state, and local environmental statutes, rules, and regulations relating to air quality, water quality, waste management, wildlife protection, the management of natural resources, and the protection of human health and safety that could, among other things, require additional pollution control equipment, limit the use of certain fuels, restrict the output of certain facilities, or otherwise increase costs. Significant capital expenditures, operating and other costs are associated with compliance with environmental requirements, and these expenditures and costs could become even more significant in the future as a result of regulatory changes.

        For example, there is increasing likelihood thatExamples of potential future regulatory changes include additional regulation of greenhouse gas emissions will occur at the federal, regional, and/or state level, whichheightened enforcement of new source review requirements, increased regulation of coal combustion by-products, and mandated investment in maximum achievable control technology or renewable energy resources. One or more of these changes could increase our compliance and operating costs.costs or require significant commitments of capital.

        We are subject to liability under environmental laws for the costs of remediating environmental contamination. Remediation activities include the cleanup of current facilities and former properties, including manufactured gas plant operations and offsite waste disposal facilities. The remediation costs could be significantly higher than the liabilities recorded by us. Also, our subsidiaries are currently involved in proceedings relating to sites where hazardous substances have been released and may be subject to additional proceedings in the future.

        We are subject to legal proceedings by individuals alleging injury from exposure to hazardous substances and could incur liabilities that may be material to our financial results. Additional proceedings could be filed against us in the future.

        We may also be required to assume environmental liabilities in connection with future acquisitions. As a result, we may be liable for significant environmental remediation costs and other liabilities arising from the operation of acquired facilities, which may adversely affect our financial results.


Our generation business may incur substantial costsWe, and liabilities dueBGE in particular, are subject to its ownershipextensive local, state and operation of nuclear generating facilities.federal regulation that could affect our operations and costs.

We ownare subject to regulation by federal and operate nuclear power plants. Ownershipstate governmental entities, including the FERC, the NRC, the Maryland PSC and operationthe utility commissions of these plants exposesother states in which we have operations. In addition, changing governmental policies and regulatory actions can have a significant impact on us. Regulations can affect, for example, allowed rates of return, requirements for plant operations, recovery of costs, limitations on dividend payments, and the regulation or re-regulation of wholesale and retail competition.

        BGE's distribution rates are subject to regulation by the Maryland PSC, and such rates are effective until new rates are approved. If the Maryland PSC does not approve adequate new rates, BGE might not be able to recover certain costs it incurs or earn an adequate rate of return. In addition, limited categories of costs are recovered through adjustment charges that are periodically reset to reflect current and projected costs. Inability to recover material costs not included in rates or adjustment clauses could have an adverse effect on our, or BGE's, cash flow and financial position.

        Energy legislation enacted in Maryland in June 2006 and April 2007 mandated that the Maryland PSC review Maryland's competitive electricity market. Although the settlement agreement reached with the State of Maryland in March 2008 terminated certain studies relating to the 1999 deregulation settlement, the State of Maryland is still undertaking a review of the Maryland electric industry and market structure to consider various options for providing standard offer service to residential customers, including re-regulation. We cannot at this time predict the final outcome of this review or how such outcome may affect our, or BGE's financial results, but it could be material.

        The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act provides for a new regulatory regime for derivatives. Final regulations may address collateral requirements, exchange margin cash postings, and other aspects of derivative transactions, which if applicable to us despite being an end user of derivatives, could require us to risks in addition to those that result from owning and operating non-nuclear power generation facilities. These risks include normal operating risks for a nuclear facility and the risks of a nuclear accident.

        Nuclear Operating Risks.    The ownership and operation of nuclear generating facilities involve routine operating risks, including:

        Nuclear Accident Risks.    In the event of a nuclear accident, the cost of property damage and other expenses incurred may exceed our insurance coverage available from both private sources and an industry retrospective payment plan. In addition, in the event of an accident at one of our or another participating insured party's nuclear plants, we could be assessed retrospective insurance premiums (because all nuclear plant operators contribute to a nationwide catastrophic insurance fund). Uninsured losses or the payment of retrospective insurance premiums could eachotherwise have a material adverse effect on our financial results.business.


20


Table of Contents


Our generation growth plans        We are also subject to mandatory reliability standards enacted by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) and enforced by the FERC. Compliance with the mandatory reliability standards may not achieve the desired financial results.

Wesubject us to higher operating costs and may expand our generation capacity over the next several years through increasing the generating power of existing plants, the renovation of retired plants owned by us, and the construction or acquisition of new plants. The renovation, development, construction, and acquisition of additional generation capacity involves numerous risks. Any planned power uprates, construction, or renovation could result in cost overruns, lower than expected plant efficiency, and higher operating and other costs. With respect to the renovation of retired plants or the construction of new plants, we may incur significant sums for preliminary engineering, permitting, legal, and other expenses before it can be established whether a project is feasible, economically attractive, or capable of being financed.

increased capital expenditures. If we were unableare found to be in noncompliance with the mandatory reliability standards, we could be subject to sanctions, including substantial monetary penalties. The State of Maryland also is considering legislative or regulatory changes that would impose reliability and quality of service standards on electric and gas companies, including penalties for failure to meet those standards.

        Further, federal and/or state regulatory approval may be necessary for us to complete transactions. As part of the construction or renovation of a plant, weregulatory approval process, governmental entities may not be able to recover our investment in the project. Furthermore, we may be unable to run any new, acquired or renovated plants as efficiently as projected, which could result in higher-than-projected operatingimpose terms and other costs that adversely affect our financial results.



We often rely on single suppliers and at times on single customers, exposing us to significant financial risks if either should fail to perform their obligations.

We often rely on a single supplier for the provision of fuel, water, and other services required for operation of a facility, and at times, we rely on a single customer or a few customers to purchase all or a significant portion of a facility's output, in some cases under long-term agreements that provide the support for any project debt used to finance the facility. The failure of any one customer or supplier to fulfill its contractual obligations could negatively impact our financial results. Consequently, our financial performance dependsconditions on the continued performance by customerstransaction or our business that are unfavorable or add significant additional costs to our future operations.

        The regulatory and suppliers of their obligations under these long-term agreements.


Reduced liquidity in the markets in which we operate could impair our ability to appropriately manage the risks of our operations.

We are an active participant in energy markets through our competitive energy businesses. The liquidity of regional energy markets is an important factor in our ability to manage risks in these operations. Over the past several years, several merchant energy businesses have ended or significantly reduced their activities as a result of several factors including government investigations, changes in market design and deteriorating credit quality. As a result, several regional energy markets experienced a significant decline in liquidity. Liquidity in the energy markets can be adversely affected by various factors, including price volatility and the availability of credit. As a result, future reductions in liquiditylegislative process may restrict our ability to manage our risks and this could impact our financial results.


We may not fully hedge our generation assets, competitive supply or other market positions against changesgrow earnings in commodity prices, and our hedging procedures may not work as planned.

To lower our financial exposure related to commodity price fluctuations, we routinely enter into contracts to hedge a portioncertain parts of our purchasebusiness, cause delays in or affect business planning and sale commitments, weather positions, fuel requirements, inventories of natural gas, coaltransactions and other commodities, and competitive supply. As part of this strategy, we routinely utilize fixed-price forward physical purchase and sales contracts, futures, financial swaps, and option contracts traded in the over-the-counter marketsincrease our, or on exchanges. However, we may not cover the entire exposure of our assets or positions to market price volatility and the coverage will vary over time. Fluctuating commodity prices may negatively impact our financial results to the extent we have unhedged positions.

        In addition, risk management tools and metrics such as daily value at risk, stop loss limits and liquidity guidelines are based on historical price movements. If price movements significantly or persistently deviate from historical behavior, the limits may not protect us from significant losses.

        Our risk management policies and procedures may not always work as planned. As a result of these and other factors, we cannot predict with precision the impact that risk management decisions may have on our financial results.BGE's, costs.


The use of derivative contracts by us in the normal course of business could result in financial losses that negatively impact our financial results.

We use derivative instruments, such as swaps, options, futures and forwards, to manage our commodity and financial market risks and to engage in trading activities. We could recognize financial losses as a result of volatility in the market values of these contracts or if a counterparty fails to perform.

        In the absence of actively quoted market prices and pricing information from external sources, the valuation of these derivative instruments involves management's judgment or use of estimates. As a result, changes in the underlying assumptions or use of alternative valuation methods could affect the reported fair value of these contracts.


A failure in our operational systems or infrastructure, or those of third parties, may adversely affect our financial results.

Our businesses are dependent upon our operational systems to process a large amount of data and complex transactions. If any of our financial, accounting or other data processing systems fail or have other significant shortcomings, our financial results could be adversely affected. Our financial results could also be adversely affected if an employee causes our operational systems to fail, either as a result of inadvertent error or by deliberately tampering with or manipulating our operational systems. In addition, dependence upon automated systems may further increase the risk that operational system flaws or employee tampering or manipulation of those systems will result in losses that are difficult to detect.

        We may also be subject to disruptions of our operational systems arising from events that are wholly or partially beyond our control (for example, natural disasters, acts of terrorism, epidemics, computer viruses and telecommunications outages). Third party systems on which we rely could also suffer operational system failure. Any of these occurrences could disrupt one or more of our businesses, result in potential liability or reputational damage or otherwise have an adverse affect on our financial results.



We operate in deregulatedcompetitive segments of the electric and gas industries created by federal and state restructuring initiatives. If competitive restructuring of the electric or gas industries is reversed, discontinued, restricted, or delayed, our business prospects and financial results could be materially adversely affected.

The regulatory environment applicable to the electric and natural gas industries has undergone substantial changes as a result of restructuring initiatives at both the state and federal levels. These initiatives have had a significant impact on the nature of the electric and natural gas industries and the manner in which their participants conduct their businesses. We have targeted the competitive segments of the electric and natural gas industries created by these initiatives.

        Due to recent events in the energy markets, energyEnergy companies have been under increased scrutiny by state legislatures, regulatory bodies, capital markets, and credit rating agencies. This increased scrutiny could lead to substantial changes in laws and regulations affecting us, including modifications to the auction processes in competitive markets and new accounting standards that could change the way we are required to record revenues, expenses, assets, and liabilities. Recent proposals byProposals in the State of Maryland PSCfrom time to time relating to the structure of the electric industry in Maryland and various options for re-regulation of the industry is one exampleare examples of how these laws and regulations can change. In addition, other states are seeking more direct ways to affect the results of wholesale capacity markets, including legislation adopted in New Jersey that provides guaranteed cost recovery for the development of up to 2,000 MWs of generation in exchange for the new generation clearing in the PJM capacity market. We cannot predict the future development of regulation or legislation in these markets or the ultimate effect that this changing regulatory environment will have on our business.

        If competitive restructuring of the electric and natural gas markets is reversed, discontinued, restricted, or delayed, or if the recent Maryland PSClegislative or regulatory proposals are implemented in a manner adverse to us, our business prospects and financial results could be negatively impacted.


Our financial results may be harmed if transportation and transmission availability is limited or unreliable.

We have business operations throughout the United States and internationally.in Canada. As a result, we depend on transportation and transmission facilities owned and operated by utilities and other energy companies to deliver the electricity, coal,natural gas and natural gasother related products we sell to the wholesale and retail markets, as well as the natural gas and coal we purchase to supply some of our generating facilities. If transportation or transmission is disrupted or capacity is inadequate, our ability to sell and deliver products may be hindered. Such disruptions could also hinder our ability to provide electricity, coal, or natural gas to our customers or power plants and may materially adversely affect our financial results.


BGE's electric and gas infrastructure may require significant expenditures to maintain and is subject to operational failure, which could result in potential liability.

Much of BGE's electric and gas operational systems and infrastructure, such as gas mains and pipelines and electric transmission and distribution equipment, has been in service for many years. Older equipment, even if maintained in accordance with good utility practices, is subject to operational failure, including due to events that are beyond BGE's control, and may require significant expenditures to operate efficiently. Operational failure could result in potential liability if such failure results in damage to property or injury to individuals. As a result, electric and gas infrastructure expenditures and operational failure of equipment could have an adverse effect on our, or BGE's, financial results.

Our merchant energyNewEnergy business has contractual obligations to certain customers to provide full requirements service, which makes it difficult to predict and plan for load requirements and may result in reduced revenues and increased operating costs to our business.

Our merchant energyNewEnergy business has contractual obligations to certain customers to supply full requirements service to such customers to satisfy all or a portion of their energy requirements. The uncertainty regarding the amount of load that our merchant energyNewEnergy business must be prepared to supply to customers may increase our operating costs. The process of estimating the load requirements of our


21


Table of Contents

customers is complicated by potential variability in demand resulting from extreme changes in weather and economic factors affecting our customers. A significant under- or over-estimation of load requirements could result in our merchant energyNewEnergy business not having enough power or having too much power to cover its load obligation, in which case it would be required to buy or sell power from or to third parties at prevailing market prices. Those prices may not be favorable and thus could reduce our revenues and/or increase our operating costs.costs and result in the possibility of reduced earnings or incurring losses.


Our financial results may fluctuate on a seasonal and quarterly basis or as a result of severe weather.

Our business is affected by weather conditions. Our overall operating results may fluctuate substantially on a seasonal basis, and the pattern of this fluctuation may change depending on the nature and location of any facility we acquire and the terms of any contract to which we become a party. Weather conditions directly influence the demand for electricity and natural gas and affect the price of energy commodities.

        Generally, demand for electricity peaks in winter and summer and demand for gas peaks in the winter. Typically, when winters are warmer than expected and summers are cooler than expected, demand for energy is lower, resulting in less electric and gas consumption than forecasted. Depending on prevailing market prices for electricity and gas, these and other unexpected conditions may reduce our revenues and results of operations. First and third quarter financial results, in particular, are substantially dependent on weather conditions, and may make period comparisons less relevant.

        Severe weather can be destructive, causing outages and/or property damage. This could require us to incur additional costs. Catastrophic weather, such as hurricanes, could impact our or our customers' operating facilities, communication systems and technology. Unfavorable weather conditions may have a material adverse effect on our financial results.


A downgradeInvestment in our credit ratings could negativelynew business initiatives and markets may not be successful.

Our NewEnergy business has sought to invest in new business initiatives and actively participate in new markets. These include, but are not limited to, unconventional oil and gas exploration and production, residential retail power and gas sales, solar and wind generation, and managed load response. Such initiatives may involve significant risks and uncertainties, including distraction of management from current operations, inadequate return on capital, and unidentified issues not discovered in the diligence performed prior to launching an initiative or entering a market. Due to these risks, no assurance can be given that such initiatives will be successful and will not materially adversely affect our ability to access capital and/financial results. Additionally, as these markets mature, there may be new market entrants or operateexpansion by established competitors that increase competition for customers and resources, which could result in us not achieving our wholesaleplans and retail competitive supply businesses.

We rely on access to capital markets as a source of liquidity for capital requirements not satisfied by


operating cash flows. If any of our credit ratings were to be downgraded, especially below investment grade, our ability to raise capital on favorable terms, including the commercial paper markets, could be hindered, and our borrowing costs would increase. Additionally, the business prospects of our wholesale and retail competitive supply businesses, which in many cases rely on the creditworthiness of Constellation Energy, would be negatively impacted. Some of the factors that affect credit ratings are cash flows, liquidity, the amount of debt as a component of total capitalization, and political, legislative and regulatory events.

        In addition, the ability of BGE to recover its costs of providing service and timing of BGE's recovery could have a material adverse effect on the credit ratingsour financial results.

A failure in our operational systems or infrastructure, or those of BGE and us.


We, and BGE in particular, are subject to extensive local, state and federal regulation that couldthird parties, may adversely affect our operationsfinancial results.

Our businesses are dependent upon our operational systems to process a large amount of data and costs.

We are subject to regulation by federal and state governmental entities, including the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Maryland PSC and the utility commissions of other states in which we have operations. In addition, changing governmental policies and regulatory actions can have a significant impact on us. Regulations can affect, for example, allowed rates of return, requirements for plant operations, recovery of costs, limitations on dividend payments and the regulation or re-regulation of wholesale and retail competition (including but not limited to retail choice and transmission costs).

        BGE's distribution rates are subject to regulation by the Maryland PSC, and such rates are effective until new rates are approved. In addition, limited categories of costs are recovered through adjustment charges that are periodically reset to reflect current and projected costs. Inability to recover material costs not included in rates or adjustment clauses, including increases in uncollectible customer accounts that may result from higher gas or electric costs, could have an adverse effect on our, or BGE's, cash flow and financial position.

        Energy legislation enacted in Maryland in June 2006 and April 2007 mandated that the Maryland PSC review Maryland's deregulated electricity market. In December 2007 and January 2008, the Maryland PSC issued interim reports that addressed the costs and benefits of options for re-regulation and reviewed the impact to customers resulting from Maryland's deregulation process. In addition, the Maryland PSC continues to review the relationship between Constellation Energy and BGE. Because reviews of the Maryland electric industry and market structure are ongoing, we cannot at this time predict the final outcome of these reviews and proposals or how such outcome may affect our, or BGE's, financial results, but it could be material.

        In addition, the June 2006 legislation required BGE to provide credits to residential electric customers totaling approximately $39 million annually. In January 2008, we notified the State of Marylandcomplex transactions. If any of our intent to file a federal action to enforcefinancial, accounting, or other data processing systems fail or have other significant shortcomings, our rights under the 1999 Maryland electric deregulation settlement and to challenge the constitutionality of the residential customer credits provided for under the June 2006 legislation. We may incur significant costs to litigate this action and we cannot provide any assurances that it will be resolved in our favor. If the action is resolved in a manner adverse to us, which may include a court determining that the legislation appropriately required the residential rate credits or overturning aspects of the 1999 electric deregulation settlement, the impact on our, or BGE's, financial results could be material.adversely affected. Our financial results could also be adversely affected if an employee causes our operational systems to fail, either as a result of inadvertent error or by deliberately tampering with or manipulating our operational systems. In addition, dependence upon automated systems may further increase the risk that operational system flaws or employee tampering or manipulation of those systems will result in losses that are difficult to detect.

        The regulatory processWe may restrict our abilityalso be subject to grow earnings in certain partsdisruptions of our business, cause delays inoperational systems arising from events that are wholly or affect business planningpartially beyond our control (for example, natural disasters, acts of terrorism, epidemics, computer viruses and transactions and increase our,telecommunications outages). Third party systems on which we rely could also suffer operational system failure. Any of these occurrences could disrupt one or BGE's, costs.


Poor market performance will affect our benefit plan and nuclear decommissioning trust asset values, which may adversely affect our liquidity and financial results.

Our qualified pension obligations have exceeded the fair valuemore of our plan assets since 2001. At December 31, 2007, our qualified pension obligations were approximately $315 million greater than the fair value of our plan assets. The performance of the capital markets will affect the value of the assets that are heldbusinesses, result in trust to satisfy our future obligations under our qualified pension plans. A decline in the market value of those assets may increase our funding requirements for these obligations, which may adversely affect our liquidity and financial results.

        We are required to maintain funded trusts to satisfy our future obligations to decommission our nuclear power plants. A decline in the market value of those assets due to poor investment performancepotential liability or other factors may increase our funding requirements for these obligations, which mayreputational damage or otherwise have an adverse effectaffect on our liquidity and financial results.

Our ability to successfully identify, complete and integrate acquisitions is subject to significant risks, including the effect of increased competition.

We are likely to encounter significant competition for acquisition opportunities that may become available. In addition, we may be unable to identify attractive acquisition opportunities at favorable prices, to secure the financing necessary to undertake them, or to successfully and timely complete and integrate them. Specifically, we intend to continue to pursue the acquisition of new generating plants in regions where we have significant retail and wholesale customer supply operations. Acquired plants may not generate the projected rates of return or sufficiently match generation capacity with retail and wholesale customer supply operations volumes causing an increase in collateral requirements. If we cannot identify, complete and integrate acquisitions successfully, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.


22


Table of Contents

War, and threats of terrorism and catastrophic events that could result from terrorism may impact ourthe results of our operations in unpredictable ways.

We cannot predict the impact that any future act of war, terrorist attacks mayattack, or catastrophic event might have on the energy industry in general and on our business in particular. In addition, any retaliatory military strikes or sustained military campaign may affect our operations in unpredictable ways, such as changes in insurance markets and disruptions of fuel supplies and markets, particularly oil.


The possibility alone that infrastructure facilities, such as electric generation, electric and gas transmission and distribution facilities would be direct targets of, or indirect casualties of, an act of terror, war, or a catastrophic event may affect our operations. Furthermore, these catastrophic events could compromise the physical or cyber security of our facilities, which could adversely affect our ability to manage our business effectively.

        Such activity may have an adverse effect on the United States economy in general. A lower level of economic activity might result in a decline in energy consumption, which may adversely affect our financial results or restrict our future growth. Instability in the financial markets as a result of war, threats of terrorism, or warand catastrophic events may affect our stock price and our ability to raise capital.

        In addition, we maintain a level of insurance coverage consistent with industry practices against property and casualty losses subject to unforeseen occurrences or catastrophic events that may damage or destroy assets or interrupt operations. Furthermore, in the event of a severe disruption resulting from war, threats of terrorism, and catastrophic events, we have contingency plans and employ crisis management to respond and recover operations. Despite these measures, there may be events beyond our control that may severely impact operations and affect financial performance.


A downgrade in our credit ratings could negatively affect our ability to access capital and/or operate our wholesale and retail NewEnergy business.

We rely on access to capital markets as a source of liquidity for capital requirements not satisfied by operating cash flows. If any of our credit ratings were to be downgraded, especially below investment grade, our ability to raise capital on favorable terms, including in the commercial paper markets, if available, could be hindered, and our borrowing costs would increase. Additionally, the business prospects of our wholesale and retail NewEnergy business, which in many cases rely on the creditworthiness of Constellation Energy, would be negatively impacted. In this regard, we have certain agreements that contain provisions that would require us to post additional collateral upon a credit rating downgrade. Based on market conditions and contractual obligations at the time of a downgrade, we could be required to post collateral in an amount that exceeds our available liquidity. Some of the factors that affect credit ratings are cash flows, liquidity, the amount of debt as a component of total capitalization, and political, legislative, and regulatory events.

We are subject to employee workforce factors that could affect our businesses and financial results.

We are subject to employee workforce factors, including loss or retirement of key executives or other employees, availability of qualified personnel, collective bargaining agreements with union employees, and work stoppage that could affect our financial results. In particular, our competitive energy businesses are dependent, in part, on recruiting and retaining personnel with experience in sophisticated energy transactions and the functioning of complex wholesale markets.


Our ability to successfully identify, complete and integrate acquisitions is subject to significant risks, including the effect of increased competition.

We are likely to encounter significant competition for acquisition opportunities that may become available. In addition, we may be unable to identify attractive acquisition opportunities at favorable prices and to successfully and timely complete and integrate them.



Item 2. Properties

Constellation Energy occupies approximately 900,000856,000 square feet of leased and owned office space in North America, which includes its corporate offices in Baltimore, Maryland. We describe our electric generation properties on the next page. We also have leases for other offices and services located in the Baltimore metropolitan region, and for various real property and facilities relating to our generation projects.

        BGE owns its principal headquarters building located in downtown Baltimore. BGE also leases approximately 16,670 square feet of office space. In addition, BGE owns propane air and liquefied natural gas facilities as discussed inItem 1. Business—Gas Business section.

        BGE also has rights-of-way to maintain 26-inch natural gas mains across certain Baltimore City-owned property (principally parks) which expired in 2004. BGE is in the process of renewing the rights-of-way with Baltimore City for an additional 25 years. The expiration of the rights-of-way does not affect BGE's ability to use the rights-of-way during the renewal process.

        BGE has electric transmission and electric and gas distribution lines located:

        All of BGE's property is subject to the lien of BGE's mortgage securing its mortgage bonds. The generation facilities transferred to our subsidiaries by BGE on July 1, 2000, along with the stock we own in certain of our subsidiaries, are subject to the lien of BGE's mortgage. We expect the assets to be released from this lien following payment in March 2008 of the last series of bonds outstanding under the mortgage and the discharge of the mortgage.

We believe we have satisfactory title to our power project facilities in accordance with standards generally accepted in the energy industry, subject to exceptions, which in our opinion, would not have a material adverse effect on the use or value of the facilities.

        Our merchant energyNewEnergy business owns several natural gas producing properties. We also lease office space in the United Kingdom and Australia to support our merchant energy business.


23


Table of Contents

        The following table describes our generating facilities:

Plant
 Location
 Capacity (MW)
 % Owned
 Capacit
Owned (MW)

 Primary Fuel
 
  
 (at December 31, 2007)

Mid-Atlantic Region          
 Calvert Cliffs Calvert Co., MD 1,735 100.0 1,735 Nuclear
 Brandon Shores Anne Arundel Co., MD 1,286 100.0 1,286 Coal
 H. A. Wagner Anne Arundel Co., MD 963 100.0 963 Coal/Oil/Gas
 C. P. Crane Baltimore Co., MD 399 100.0 399 Oil/Coal
 Keystone Armstrong and Indiana Cos., PA 1,711 21.0 359 (A)Coal
 Conemaugh Indiana Co., PA 1,711 10.6 181 (A)Coal
 Perryman Harford Co., MD 355 100.0 355 Oil/Gas
 Riverside Baltimore Co., MD 232 100.0 232 Oil/Gas
 Handsome Lake Rockland Twp, PA 268 100.0 268 Gas
 Notch Cliff Baltimore Co., MD 120 100.0 120 Gas
 Westport Baltimore City, MD 116 100.0 116 Gas
 Philadelphia Road Baltimore City, MD 64 100.0 64 Oil
 Safe Harbor Safe Harbor, PA 417 66.7 278 Hydro
    
   
  
Total Mid-Atlantic Region *   9,376   6,355  

Plants with Power Purchase Agreements

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Scriba, NY 620 100.0 620 Nuclear
 Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Scriba, NY 1,138 82.0 933 Nuclear
 R.E. Ginna Ontario, NY 581 100.0 581 Nuclear
    
   
  
Total Plants with Power Purchase Agreements 2,339   2,134  

Other

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 Panther Creek Nesquehoning, PA 80 50.0 40 Waste Coal
 Colver Colver Township, PA 104 25.0 26 Waste Coal
 Sunnyside Sunnyside, UT 51 50.0 26 Waste Coal
 ACE Trona, CA 102 31.1 32 Coal
 Jasmin Kern Co., CA 35 50.0 18 Coal
 POSO Kern Co., CA 35 50.0 18 Coal
 Mammoth Lakes G-1 Mammoth Lakes, CA 6 50.0 3 Geothermal
 Mammoth Lakes G-2 Mammoth Lakes, CA 13 50.0 7 Geothermal
 Mammoth Lakes G-3 Mammoth Lakes, CA 13 50.0 7 Geothermal
 Soda Lake I Fallon, NV 4 50.0 2 Geothermal
 Soda Lake II Fallon, NV 10 50.0 5 Geothermal
 Rocklin Placer Co., CA 24 50.0 12 Biomass
 Fresno Fresno, CA 24 50.0 12 Biomass
 Chinese Station Jamestown, CA 20 45.0 9 Biomass
 Malacha Muck Valley, CA 32 50.0 16 Hydro
 SEGS IV Kramer Junction, CA 33 12.2 4 Solar
 SEGS V Kramer Junction, CA 24 4.2 1 Solar
 SEGS VI Kramer Junction, CA 34 8.8 3 Solar
    
   
  
Total Other *   644   239  
    
   
  
Total Generating Facilities *   12,359   8,728  
    
   
  

 
  
 At December 31, 2010  
  
Plant
 Location
 Capacity
(MW)

 %
Owned

 Capacity
Owned
(MW)

 2010
Capacity
Factor
(%)

 Primary
Fuel

 

Calvert Cliffs Unit 1 (1)

 Calvert Co., MD  855  50.0  428  90.0 

Nuclear

Calvert Cliffs Unit 2 (1)

 Calvert Co., MD  850  50.0  425  97.2 

Nuclear

Nine Mile Point Unit 1 (1)

 Scriba, NY  620  50.0  310  97.5 

Nuclear

Nine Mile Point Unit 2 (1)

 Scriba, NY  1,138  41.0  467  89.7 

Nuclear

R.E. Ginna (1)

 Ontario, NY  581  50.0  291  97.2 

Nuclear

Brandon Shores

 Anne Arundel Co., MD  1,273  100.0  1,273  54.1 

Coal

H. A. Wagner

 Anne Arundel Co., MD  976  100.0  976  19.2 

Coal/Oil/Gas

C. P. Crane

 Baltimore Co., MD  399  100.0  399  24.2 

Oil/Coal

Keystone

 Armstrong and Indiana Cos., PA  1,711  21.0  359(5) 90.4 

Coal

Conemaugh

 West Moreland Co., PA  1,711  10.6  181(5) 81.1 

Coal

Perryman

 Harford Co., MD  347  100.0  347  2.2 

Oil/Gas

Riverside

 Baltimore Co., MD  228  100.0  228  0.7 

Oil/Gas

Handsome Lake

 Rockland Twp, PA  268  100.0  268  2.7 

Gas

Notch Cliff

 Baltimore Co., MD  101  100.0  101  2.0 

Gas

Westport

 Baltimore City, MD  116  100.0  116  0.5 

Gas

Gould Street

 Baltimore City, MD  97  100.0  97  2.6 

Gas

Philadelphia Road

 Baltimore City, MD  61  100.0  61  0.5 

Oil

Safe Harbor

 Safe Harbor, PA  417  66.7  278  27.1 

Hydro

Criterion

 Oakland, MD  70  100.0  70  2.5 

Wind

Grande Prairie

 Alberta, Canada  93  100.0  93  8.4 

Gas

West Valley

 Salt Lake City, UT  200  100.0  200  10.6 

Gas

Hillabee Energy Center

 Alexander City, Alabama  740  100.0  740  36.8 

Gas

Colorado Bend Energy Center

 Wharton, Texas  550  100.0  550  17.0 

Gas

Quail Run Energy Center (2)

 Odessa, Texas  550  100.0  550  15.3 

Gas

Panther Creek

 Nesquehoning, PA  80  50.0  40  96.6 

Waste Coal

Colver

 Colver Township, PA  102  25.0  26  99.2 

Waste Coal

Sunnyside

 Sunnyside, UT  51  50.0  26  84.5 

Waste Coal

ACE

 Trona, CA  102  31.1  32  88.0 

Coal

Jasmin

 Kern Co., CA  35  50.0  18  87.7 

Coal

POSO

 Kern Co., CA  35  50.0  18  92.0 

Coal

Rocklin

 Placer Co., CA  24  50.0  12  80.6 

Biomass

Fresno

 Fresno, CA  24  50.0  12  83.6 

Biomass

Chinese Station

 Jamestown, CA  22  45.0  10  58.6 

Biomass

Malacha

 Muck Valley, CA  32  50.0  16  10.6 

Hydro

Constellation Solar (6)

 Various  9  100.0  9   

Solar

SEGS IV

 Kramer Junction, CA  33  12.2  4  27.1 

Solar

SEGS V

 Kramer Junction, CA  24  4.2  1  33.0 

Solar

SEGS VI

 Kramer Junction, CA  34  8.8  3  28.4 

Solar

               

Total Generating Facilities (3)(4)

    14,559     9,030     
               
(A)(1)
We own a 50.01% membership interest in CENG, the joint venture with EDF that holds these nuclear generating assets as a result of the sale of a 49.99% interest in CENG to EDF that was completed in November 2009. We discuss this transaction in more detail in Note 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements.
(2)
On December 30, 2010, we signed an agreement to sell the Quail Run Energy Center to High Plains Diversified Energy Corporation (HPDEC) for $185.3 million. The agreement is contingent upon HPDEC obtaining financing through the sale of municipal bonds.
(3)
The sum of the individual plant capacity megawatts may not equal the total due to the effects of rounding.
(4)
Capacity figures represent summer seasonal claimed capacity amounts. For units with power purchase agreements, we use the contract capacity.
(5)
Reflects our proportionate interest in and entitlement to capacity from Keystone and Conemaugh, which include 2 MW of diesel capacity for Keystone and 1 MW of diesel capacity for Conemaugh.
(6)
Constellation Solar is our operation that constructs, owns, and operates solar facilities.

        In January 2011, we completed the acquisition of Boston Generating's 2,950MW nameplate capacity (2,656 MW of summer seasonal claimed capacity) fleet of generating plants: four natural gas-fired plants, including Mystic 8 and 9 (1,580 MW), Fore River (787 MW), and Mystic 7 (574 MW) as well as a fuel oil plant, Mystic Jet (9 MW). After this acquisition, our total summer seasonal claimed capacity owned increased to approximately 11,686 MW.

        In December 2009, we were selected by the State of Maryland to develop an approximately 17 MW solar photovoltaic power installation in Emmitsburg, Maryland. This $60 million solar facility will be constructed, owned, operated and maintained by us. We expect the project to be completed by December 2012.

* The sum
24


Table of the individual plant capacity MWs may not equal the totals due to the effectsContents

        As of rounding.

In February 2008,December 31, 2010, we acquiredalso have a partially completed 774 MW gas-fired combined-cycle power generation50% ownership interest in a waste coal processing facility located in Alabama, which we plan to complete and have ready for commercial operation in early 2010. We discuss this acquisition in more detail inNote 15 to Consolidated Financial Statements.Hazelton, Pennsylvania.


        The following table describes our processing facilities:

Plant
Location
% Owned
Primary
Fuel

A/C FuelsHazelton, PA50.0Waste Coal Processing
Gary PCIGary, IN24.5Coal Processing
Low Country *Cross, SC99.0Synfuel Processing
PC Synfuel VA I *Norton, VA16.7Synfuel Processing
PC Synfuel WV I *Chelyan, WV16.7Synfuel Processing
PC Synfuel WV II *Mount Storm, WV16.7Synfuel Processing
PC Synfuel WV III *Chester, VA16.7Synfuel Processing

* Facility to be decommissioned in 2008.



Item 3. Legal Proceedings

We discuss our legal proceedings inNote 12 to Consolidated Financial Statements.



Item 4. Submission of Matters to Vote of Security Holders[Removed and Reserved]

Not applicable.


Executive Officers of the Registrant

Name
 Age
 Present Office
 Other Offices or Positions Held
During Past Five Years

Mayo A. Shattuck III

 5356 Chairman of the Board (since July 2002), President and Chief Executive Officer (since November 2001) of Constellation Energy Chairman of the Board of BGE.

John R. Collins


50


Executive Vice President (since July 2007) and Chief Financial Officer (since May 2007) of Constellation Energy; Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company

Michael J. Wallace (1)

63Vice Chairman (since March 2008), Executive Vice President (since January 2004) and Chief Operating Officer (since May 2007); and member of Board of Managers2009) of Constellation Energy Partners LLC (since September 2006)
 

President and Chief RiskExecutive Officer—Constellation Energy and Senior Vice President—Constellation Energy.Nuclear Group, LLC

Thomas V. Brooks

Henry B. Barron


 

4560

 

President of Constellation Energy Resources (since May 2007); Chairman of Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc. (since August 2005); and Executive Vice President of Constellation Energy (since January 2004)


Vice Chairman—Constellation Energy and President and Chief Executive Officer—Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc.

Michael J. Wallace


60


President (since January 2002) and Chief Executive Officer (since May 2005) of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC (formerly known as Constellation Generation Group, LLC); and Executive Vice President of Constellation Energy (since January 2004)


None.

Thomas F. Brady


58


Executive Vice President of Constellation Energy (since January 2004); and Chairman of the Board of BGE (since April 2007)


Senior Vice President, Corporate Strategy and Development—Constellation Energy.


Irving B. Yoskowitz


62


Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Constellation Energy (since June 2005)


Senior Counsel—Crowell & Moring (law firm); and Senior Partner—Global Technology Partners, LLC (investment banking and consulting firm).

Felix J. Dawson


40


Co-Chief Commercial Officer of Constellation Energy Resources (since August 2007); Senior Vice President of Constellation Energy (since October 2006); Co-President and Co-Chief Executive Officer of Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc. (since August 2005)2008); and President and Chief Executive Officer (since September 2008) of Constellation Energy Partners LLC (since May 2006)Nuclear Group

 

Co-Chief Commercial Officer—Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc.; and Managing Director—Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc.

George E. Persky


38


Co-Chief CommercialChief Nuclear Officer of Constellation Energy Resources (since August 2007); Senior Vice President of ConstellationNuclear Group; and Group Executive and Chief Nuclear Officer—Duke Energy (since October 2006); and Co-President and Co-Chief Executive Officer of Constellation Energy Commodities Group,  Inc. (since August 2005)


Co-Chief Commercial Officer—Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc.; and Managing Director—Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc.

Kenneth W. DeFontes, Jr.

James L. Connaughton


 

5749

 

President and Chief Executive Officer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Senior Vice President of Constellation Energy (since October 2004)


Vice President, Electric Transmission and Distribution—BGE.

Paul J. Allen


56


Senior Vice President, Corporate Affairs, Public and Environmental Policy (since February 2009)
Chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality and Director of the White House Office of Environmental Policy

Paul J. Allen

59Senior Vice President (since January 2004) and Chief Environmental Officer (since June 2007) of Constellation Energy
 

Vice President, Corporate Affairs—Constellation Energy.None

Beth S. Perlman

Charles A. Berardesco


 

4752

 

Senior Vice President (since JanuaryOctober 2008), General Counsel (since October 2008) and Corporate Secretary (since July 2004), Chief Administrative Officer (since June 2007) and Chief Information Officer (since April 2002) of Constellation Energy

 

Vice President—President and Deputy General Counsel—Constellation Energy.Energy; and Associate General Counsel—Constellation Energy

Marc

Brenda L. UgolBoultwood


 

4946

 

Senior Vice President Human Resourcesand Chief Risk Officer of Constellation Energy (since January 2004)2008)

 

Global Head of Strategy and Global Head of Derivative Services, Alternative Investment Services and Head of Treasury Services Risk Management—J.P. Morgan Chase & Company

Kenneth W. DeFontes, Jr. 

60Senior Vice President of Constellation Energy (since October 2004); and President and Chief Executive Officer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (since October 2004)None

Andrew L. Good

43Senior Vice President, Corporate Strategy and Development of Constellation Energy (since November 2009)Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer—Constellation Energy Resources; Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer—Constellation Energy Commodities Group; and Senior Vice President, Finance—Constellation Energy

Kathleen W. Hyle

52Senior Vice President of Constellation Energy (since September 2005); and Chief Operating Officer of Constellation Energy Resources (since November 2008)Senior Vice President, Finance, and Chief Financial Officer—Constellation Energy Nuclear Group; Chief Financial Officer—UniStar Nuclear Energy; Senior Vice President, Finance—Constellation Energy; and Chief Financial Officer, Constellation NewEnergy

Mary L. Lauria

46Senior Vice President and Chief Human Resources—Resources Officer of Constellation Energy.Energy (since October 2010)Vice President and Chief Talent Officer—Constellation Energy; Vice President, Talent Management and Leadership Development—Wyeth; Director, Global Talent Management—Johnson & Johnson

Jonathan W. Thayer

39Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Constellation Energy (since October 2008)Vice President and Managing Director, Corporate Strategy and Development—Constellation Energy; Treasurer—Constellation Energy; and Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer—Baltimore Gas and Electric Company
(1)
Mr. Wallace will retire from Constellation Energy effective April 2011.

        Officers are elected by, and hold office at the will of, the Board of Directors and do not serve a "term of office" as such. There is no arrangement or understanding between any director or officer and any other person pursuant to which the director or officer was selected.


25


Table of Contents


PART II

Item 5. Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Shareholder Matters, and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities, and Unregistered Sales of Equity and Use of Proceeds

Stock Trading

Constellation Energy's common stock is traded under the ticker symbol CEG. It is listed on the New York and Chicago stock exchanges.

        As of January 31, 2008,2011, there were 39,18633,239 common shareholders of record.

Dividend Policy

Constellation Energy pays dividends on its common stock after its Board of Directors declares them. There are no contractual limitations on Constellation Energy paying common stock dividends.dividends, unless Constellation Energy elects to defer interest payments on the 8.625% Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures due June 15, 2063, and any deferred interest remains unpaid.

        Dividends have been paid continuously since 1910 on the common stock of Constellation Energy, BGE, and their predecessors. Future dividends depend upon future earnings, our financial condition, and other factors.

        In January 2008,2011, we announced an increase in oura quarterly dividend from $0.435 to $0.4775of $0.24 per share payable April 1, 20082011 to holders of record at the close of business on March 10, 2008.2011. This is equivalent to an annual rate of $1.91$0.96 per share.

        Quarterly dividends were declared on our common stock during 20072010 and 20062009 in the amounts set forth below.

        BGE pays dividends on its common stock after its Board of Directors declares them. However, pursuant to the order issued by the Maryland PSC on October 30, 2009 in connection with its approval of the transaction with EDF, BGE cannot pay common dividends to Constellation Energy if (a) after the dividend payment, BGE's equity ratio would be below 48% as calculated under the Maryland PSC's ratemaking precedents or (b) BGE's senior unsecured credit rating is rated by two of the three major credit rating agencies below investment grade. There are no contractualother limitations on BGE paying common stock dividends unless:


Common Stock Dividends and Price Ranges

 
 2007
 2006
 
  
 Price
  
 Price
 
 Dividend
Declared

 Dividend
Declared

 
 High
 Low
 High
 Low
First Quarter $0.435 $88.20 $68.78 $0.3775 $60.55 $54.01
Second Quarter  0.435  95.57  82.71  0.3775  55.68  50.55
Third Quarter  0.435  98.20  76.64  0.3775  60.79  53.70
Fourth Quarter  0.435  104.29  85.81  0.3775  70.20  59.00
  
       
      
Total $1.74       $1.51      
  
       
      

 
 2010 2009 
 
  
 Price  
 Price 
 
 Dividend
Declared
 Dividend
Declared
 
 
 High Low High Low 

First Quarter

 $0.24 $36.99 $31.08 $0.24 $27.97 $15.05 

Second Quarter

  0.24  38.73  32.09  0.24  28.05  20.18 

Third Quarter

  0.24  35.10  28.21  0.24  33.37  25.76 

Fourth Quarter

  0.24  33.18  27.64  0.24  36.55  30.24 
                  

Total

 $0.96       $0.96       
                  


Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchases
Purchasers

The following table discloses purchases of shares of our common stock made by us or on our behalf for the periods shown below.

Period
 Total Number
of Shares
Purchased(1)

 Average Price
Paid for Shares

 Total Number
of Shares
Purchased as
Part of Publicly
Announced
Plans or
Programs

 Maximum Dollar
Amount of Shares
that May Yet Be
Purchased Under
the Plans and Programs
(at month end)(2)

October 1 – October 31, 2007  $  $1.0 billion
November 1 – November 30, 2007 200,000  96.31 2,023,527(3) 750 million
December 1 – December 31, 2007 250,218  103.24   750 million

Total 450,218 $100.16 2,023,527  

Period
 Total Number
of Shares
Purchased (1)
 Average Price
Paid for Shares
 Total Number
of Shares
Purchased as
Part of Publicly
Announced
Plans or
Programs
 Maximum Dollar
Amount of Shares
that May Yet Be
Purchased Under
the Plans and Programs
(at month end)
 

October 1 - October 31, 2010

  113 $32.34     

November 1 - November 30, 2010

         

December 1 - December 31, 2010

  92,643  30.84     
  

Total

  92,756 $30.84     
  
(1)
Represents shares surrendered by employees to exercise stock options and to satisfy tax withholding obligations on vested restricted stock and stock option exercises and shares repurchased by us in the open market to satisfy employee stock option exercises and restricted stock grants.units.


26

(2)
In October 2007, our board


Table of directors approved a common share repurchase program for up to $1 billion of our outstanding common shares. The program is expected to be executed over the 24 months following approval in a manner that preserves flexibility to pursue additional strategic investment opportunities.

(3)
Represents shares repurchased pursuant to an accelerated share repurchase agreement entered into with a financial institution. The final price of the shares repurchased was determined based on a discount to the volume-weighted average trading price of $100.53 per share of our common stock. In January 2008, the financial institution delivered 514,376 additional shares to us at the completion of the transaction.

SeeNote 9 to Consolidated Financial Statements for a further description of our common share repurchase program and the accelerated share repurchase agreement.


Contents


Item 6. Selected Financial Data

Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries

 
 2007
 2006
 2005
 2004
 2003
 

 
 
 (In millions, except per share amounts)

 
Summary of Operations                
 Total Revenues $21,193.2 $19,284.9 $16,968.3 $12,127.2 $9,342.8 
 Total Expenses  19,858.8  18,025.2  16,023.8  11,209.1  8,395.5 
 Gain on Sale of Gas-Fired Plants    73.8       

 
 Income From Operations  1,334.4  1,333.5  944.5  918.1  947.3 
 Gain on sales of CEP equity  63.3  28.7       
 Other Income  158.6  66.1  65.5  25.5  20.6 
 Fixed Charges  305.6  328.7  310.2  326.8  336.3 

 
 Income Before Income Taxes  1,250.7  1,099.6  699.8  616.8  631.6 
 Income Taxes  428.3  351.0  163.9  118.4  222.2 

 
 Income from Continuing Operations and Before Cumulative Effects of Changes in Accounting Principles  822.4  748.6  535.9  498.4  409.4 
  (Loss) Income from Discontinued Operations, Net of Income Taxes  (0.9) 187.8  94.4  41.3  66.3 
  Cumulative Effects of Changes in Accounting Principles, Net of Income Taxes      (7.2)   (198.4)

 
 Net Income $821.5 $936.4 $623.1 $539.7 $277.3 

 
 Earnings Per Common Share from Continuing Operations and Before Cumulative Effects of Changes in Accounting Principles Assuming Dilution $4.51 $4.12 $2.98 $2.88 $2.45 
  (Loss) Income from Discontinued Operations  (0.01) 1.04  0.53  0.24  0.40 
  Cumulative Effects of Changes in Accounting Principles      (0.04)   (1.19)

 
 Earnings Per Common Share Assuming Dilution $4.50 $5.16 $3.47 $3.12 $1.66 

 
 Dividends Declared Per Common Share $1.74 $1.51 $1.34 $1.14 $1.04 

 

Summary of Financial Condition

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 Total Assets $21,945.7 $21,801.6 $21,473.9 $17,347.1 $15,593.0 

 
 Current Portion of Long-Term Debt $380.6 $878.8 $491.3 $480.4 $343.2 

 
 Capitalization                
  Long-Term Debt $4,660.5 $4,222.3 $4,369.3 $4,813.2 $5,039.2 
  Minority Interests  19.2  94.5  22.4  90.9  113.4 
  Preference Stock Not Subject to Mandatory Redemption  190.0  190.0  190.0  190.0  190.0 
  Common Shareholders' Equity  5,340.2  4,609.3  4,915.5  4,726.9  4,140.5 

 
 Total Capitalization $10,209.9 $9,116.1 $9,497.2 $9,821.0 $9,483.1 

 

Financial Statistics at Year End

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges  3.84  4.05  3.04  2.71  2.69 
 Book Value Per Share of Common Stock $29.93 $25.54 $27.57 $26.81 $24.68 

 
 2010
 2009
 2008
 2007
 2006
 
  
 
 (In millions, except per share amounts)
 

Summary of Operations

                
 

Total Revenues

 $14,340.0 $15,598.8 $19,741.9 $21,185.1 $19,271.1 
 

Total Expenses

  15,853.8  14,588.5  20,821.9  19,858.8  18,025.2 
 

Equity investment earnings (losses)

  25.0  (6.1) 76.4  8.1  13.8 
 

Gain on Sale of Interest in CENG

    7,445.6       
 

Net Gain (Loss) on Divestitures

  245.8  (468.8) 25.5    73.8 
  
 

(Loss) Income From Operations

  (1,243.0) 7,981.0  (978.1) 1,334.4  1,333.5 
 

Gains on Sales of CEP LLC equity

        63.3  28.7 
 

Other (Expense) Income

  (76.7) (140.7) (69.5) 157.4  66.8 
 

Fixed Charges

  277.8  350.1  349.1  292.4  315.5 
  
 

(Loss) Income Before Income Taxes

  (1,597.5) 7,490.2  (1,396.7) 1,262.7  1,113.5 
 

Income Tax (Benefit) Expense

  (665.7) 2,986.8  (78.3) 428.3  351.0 
  
 

(Loss) Income from Continuing Operations and Before Cumulative Effects of Changes in Accounting Principles

  (931.8) 4,503.4  (1,318.4) 834.4  762.5 
  

(Loss) Income from Discontinued Operations, Net of Income Taxes

        (0.9) 187.8 
  
 

Net (Loss) Income

 $(931.8)$4,503.4 $(1,318.4)$833.5 $950.3 
 

Net Loss (Income) Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests and BGE Preference Stock Dividends

  50.8  60.0  (4.0) 12.0  13.9 
  
 

Net (Loss) Income Attributable to Common Stock

 $(982.6)$4,443.4 $(1,314.4)$821.5 $936.4 
  
 

(Loss) Earnings Per Common Share from Continuing Operations and Before Cumulative Effects of Changes in Accounting Principles Assuming Dilution

 $(4.90)$22.19 $(7.34)$4.51 $4.12 
  

(Loss) Income from Discontinued Operations

        (0.01) 1.04 
  
 

(Loss) Earnings Per Common Share Assuming Dilution

 $(4.90)$22.19 $(7.34)$4.50 $5.16 
  
 

Dividends Declared Per Common Share

 $0.96 $0.96 $1.91 $1.74 $1.51 
  

Summary of Financial Condition

                
 

Total Assets

 $20,018.5 $23,544.4 $22,284.1 $21,742.3 $21,801.6 
  
 

Current Portion of Long-Term Debt

 $305.3 $56.9 $2,591.5 $380.6 $878.8 
  
 

Capitalization:

                
  

Long-Term Debt

 $4,448.8 $4,814.0 $5,098.7 $4,660.5 $4,222.3 
  

Noncontrolling Interests

  88.8  75.3  20.1  19.2  94.5 
  

BGE Preference Stock Not Subject to Mandatory Redemption

  190.0  190.0  190.0  190.0  190.0 
  

Common Shareholders' Equity

  7,829.2  8,697.1  3,181.4  5,340.2  4,609.3 
  
 

Total Capitalization

 $12,556.8 $13,776.4 $8,490.2 $10,209.9 $9,116.1 
  

Financial Statistics at Year End

                
 

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

  N/A  14.76  N/A  3.84  4.05 
 

Book Value Per Share of Common Stock

 $39.19 $43.27 $15.98 $29.93 $25.54 

N/A—Calculation is not applicable as a result of the net loss for 2010 and 2008.

We discuss items that affect comparability between years, including acquisitions and dispositions, accounting changes and other items, inItem 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis.


27


Table of Contents

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiaries

 
 2007
 2006
 2005
 2004
 2003
 

 
 
 (In millions)

 
Summary of Operations                
 Total Revenues $3,418.5 $3,015.4 $3,009.3 $2,724.7 $2,647.6 
 Total Expenses  3,084.2  2,646.3  2,612.8  2,353.3  2,262.6 

 
 Income From Operations  334.3  369.1  396.5  371.4  385.0 
 Other Income (Expense)  26.8  6.0  5.9  (6.4) (5.4)
 Fixed Charges  125.3  102.6  93.5  96.2  111.2 

 
 Income Before Income Taxes  235.8  272.5  308.9  268.8  268.4 
 Income Taxes  96.0  102.2  119.9  102.5  105.2 

 
 Net Income  139.8  170.3  189.0  166.3  163.2 
 Preference Stock Dividends  13.2  13.2  13.2  13.2  13.2 

 
 Earnings Applicable to Common Stock $126.6 $157.1 $175.8 $153.1 $150.0 

 

Summary of Financial Condition

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 Total Assets $5,783.0 $5,140.7 $4,742.1 $4,662.9 $4,706.6 

 
 Current Portion of Long-Term Debt $375.0 $258.3 $469.6 $165.9 $330.6 

 
 Capitalization                
  Long-Term Debt $1,862.5 $1,480.5 $1,015.1 $1,359.5 $1,343.7 
  Minority Interest  16.8  16.7  18.3  18.7  18.9 
  Preference Stock Not Subject to Mandatory Redemption  190.0  190.0  190.0  190.0  190.0 
  Common Shareholder's Equity  1,671.7  1,651.5  1,622.5  1,566.0  1,487.7 

 
 Total Capitalization $3,741.0 $3,338.7 $2,845.9 $3,134.2 $3,040.3 

 

Financial Statistics at Year End

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges  2.84  3.60  4.22  3.75  3.36 
 Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Preferred and Preference Stock Dividends  2.42  2.99  3.45  3.08  2.82 

 
 2010
 2009
 2008
 2007
 2006
 
  
 
 (In millions)
 

Summary of Operations

                
 

Total Revenues

 $3,461.7 $3,579.0 $3,703.7 $3,418.5 $3,015.4 
 

Total Expenses

  3,107.5  3,310.6  3,521.2  3,084.2  2,646.3 
  
 

Income From Operations

  354.2  268.4  182.5  334.3  369.1 
 

Other Income

  20.8  25.4  29.6  26.9  6.0 
 

Fixed Charges

  130.3  139.3  139.9  125.3  102.6 
  
 

Income Before Income Taxes

  244.7  154.5  72.2  235.9  272.5 
 

Income Taxes

  97.1  63.8  20.7  96.0  102.2 
  
 

Net Income

  147.6  90.7  51.5  139.9  170.3 
 

Preference Stock Dividends

  13.2  13.2  13.2  13.2  13.2 
  
 

Net Income Attributable to Common Stock before Noncontrolling Interests

 $134.4 $77.5 $38.3 $126.7 $157.1 
 

Net Loss (Income) Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests

    7.3    (0.1)  
  
 

Net Income Attributable to Common Stock

 $134.4 $84.8 $38.3 $126.6 $157.1 
  

Summary of Financial Condition

                
 

Total Assets

 $6,667.3 $6,453.1 $6,086.2 $5,783.0 $5,140.7 
  
 

Current Portion of Long-Term Debt

 $81.7 $56.5 $90.0 $375.0 $258.3 
  
 

Capitalization

                
  

Long-Term Debt

 $2,059.9 $2,141.4 $2,197.7 $1,862.5 $1,480.5 
  

Noncontrolling Interest

    17.6  16.9  16.8  16.7 
  

Preference Stock Not Subject to Mandatory Redemption

  190.0  190.0  190.0  190.0  190.0 
  

Common Shareholder's Equity

  2,073.2  1,938.8  1,538.2  1,671.7  1,651.5 
  
 

Total Capitalization

 $4,323.1 $4,287.8 $3,942.8 $3,741.0 $3,338.7 
  

Financial Statistics at Year End

                
 

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

  2.80  2.07  1.50  2.84  3.60 
 

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Preferred and Preference Stock Dividends

  2.41  1.80  1.33  2.42  2.99 

We discuss items that affect comparability between years, including accounting changes and other items, inItem 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis.


28


Table of Contents


Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Introduction and Overview

Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Constellation Energy) is an energy company that conducts its business through various subsidiaries includingand joint ventures organized around three business segments: a merchant energygeneration business (Generation), a customer supply business (NewEnergy), and Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (BGE). We describe our operating segments inNote 3 to Consolidated Financial Statements..

        This report is a combined report of Constellation Energy and BGE. References in this report to "we" and "our" are to Constellation Energy and its subsidiaries, collectively. References in this report to the "regulated business(es)" are to BGE. We discuss our business in more detail inItem 1. Business section and the risk factors affecting our business inItem 1A. Risk Factors section.

        In this discussion and analysis, we will explain the general financial condition of and the results of operations for Constellation Energy and BGE including:

    factors which affect our businesses,
    our earnings and costs in the periods presented,
    changes in earnings and costs between periods,
    sources of earnings,
    impact of these factors on our overall financial condition,
    expected future expenditures for capital projects, and
    expected sources of cash for future capital expenditures.expenditures,
    our net available liquidity and collateral requirements, and
    expected future expenditures for capital projects.

        As you read this discussion and analysis, refer to our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss), which present the results of our operations for 2007, 2006,2010, 2009, and 2005.2008. We analyze and explain the differences between periods in the specific line items of our Consolidated Statements of Income.Income (Loss).

        We have organized our discussion and analysis as follows:

    First, we discuss our strategy.
    We thenThen, we describe the business environment in which we operate including how recent events, regulation, weather, and other factors affect our business.
    Next, we discuss our critical accounting policies. These are the accounting policies that are most important to both the portrayal of our financial condition and results of operations and require management's most difficult, subjective or complex judgment.
    We highlight significant events that are important to understanding our results of operations and financial condition.
    We then review our results of operations beginning with an overview of our total company results, followed by a more detailed review of those results by operating segment.
    We review our financial condition addressing our sources and uses of cash, security ratings, capital resources, capital requirements, commitments, and off-balance sheet arrangements.
    We conclude with a discussion of our exposure to various market risks.


Strategy

We are pursuing aOur strategy of is to provide innovative and risk-mitigating energy products and solutions to North American wholesale and retail customers. Overall, we strive to serve our customers with diverse products and solutions to meet their energy needs.

        In executing this strategy, we leverage our core strengths of:

    maintaining and growing strong and diverse supply relationships with retail and wholesale customers,
    owning, developing, operating, and contracting for generation assets,
    integrating our expertise in managing physical and financial risks, and
    providing energy and energy related services through our competitive supply activities and BGE, ourreliable, regulated utility located in Maryland.service to customers.

        Our merchant energyNewEnergy business focuses on short-term and long-term purchases and sales of energy, capacity,electricity, natural gas, and related products to various customers, including distribution utilities, municipalities, cooperatives, and commercial, industrial, commercial,governmental, and governmental customers.residential customers in competitive markets. The retail NewEnergy customer supply operation combines a unified sales force with a customer-centric model that leverages technology to broaden the range of products and services we offer, which we believe promotes stronger customer relationships. This model focuses on efficiency and cost reduction, which we believe will provide a platform that is scalable and able to capitalize on opportunities for future growth.

        We obtain thisNewEnergy obtains energy throughfrom both owned and contracted supply resources.resources and actively manages these physical and contractual assets in order to derive incremental value. Additionally, NewEnergy is involved in the development, exploration and exploitation of natural gas properties.

        Our generationGeneration business has a fleet of plants that is strategically located in deregulated markets that support our customer-facing business and includes various fuel types, such as nuclear, coal, natural gas, oil, nuclear, and renewable sources. In additionWe generally have load obligations greater than our generation output. Going forward, we intend to owning generating facilities,invest in generation assets in the markets where we contract for power from other merchant providers, typically through power purchase agreements. We will use bothserve load to provide a more efficient and balanced profile between our owned generation production and our contractedcustomer load obligations.

        Our strategy is enabled by a fleet of generation to supportfacilities and our competitive supply operations.

        In addition, our merchant energy business is active in both upstream and downstream natural gas areas as well as coal sourcing and logistics services for the variable and fixed supply needs of global customers.

        We are a leading national competitive supplier of energy. In our wholesale and commercial and industrial retail marketing activities we are leveraging our recognized expertise in providing full requirements energy and energy-related services to enter markets, capture market share, and organically grow these businesses. Through the application of technology, intellectual capital, process improvement, and increased scale, we are seeking to reduce the cost of delivering full requirements energy and energy related services and managing risk.

        We are also responding proactively to customer needs by expanding the variety of products we offer. Our wholesale competitive supply activities include a growing operation that markets physical energy products and risk management and logistics services to generators, distributors, producers of coal, natural gas and fuel oil, and other consumers.

        We trade energy and energy-related commodities and deploy risk capital in the managementcapabilities. This combination of our portfolioGeneration and NewEnergy businesses also allows us to operate in order to earn additional returns. These activities are managed through daily value at riska manner so we can minimize our collateral requirements. We discuss our collateral requirements in theCollateral section.

        BGE, our regulated utility located in central Maryland, provides standard offer service and stop loss limits and liquidity guidelines.

        Within our retail competitive supply activities, we are marketing a broader array of products and expanding our markets. Over time, we may consider integrating the sale ofdistributes electricity and natural gas to provide one energy procurement solution for our customers.

        Collectively, the integration of owned and contracted electric generation assets with origination, fuel procurement, and risk management expertise, allows our merchant energy business to earn incremental margin and more effectively manage energy and commodity price risk over geographic regions and over time. Our focus BGE is on providing solutions to customers' energy needs, and our wholesale marketing, risk management, and trading operation adds value to our owned and contracted generation assets by providing national market access, market infrastructure, real-time market intelligence, risk management and arbitrage opportunities, and transmission and transportation expertise. Generation capacity supports our wholesale marketing, risk management, and trading operation by providing a source of reliable power supply.

        To achieve our strategic objectives, we expect to continue to pursue opportunities that expand our access to customers and to support our wholesale marketing, risk management, and trading operation with generation assets that have diversified geographic, fuel, and dispatch characteristics. We also expect to grow through buying and selling a greater number of physical energy products and services to large energy customers. We expect to


achieve operating efficiencies within our competitive supply operation and our generation fleet by selling more products through our existing sales force, benefiting from efficiencies of scale, adding to the capacity of existing plants, and making our business processes more efficient.

        We expect BGE and our other retail energy service businesses to grow through focused and disciplined expansion primarily from new customers. At BGE, we are also focusedfocusing on enhancing reliability and customer satisfaction, and is implementing customer demand response initiatives.initiatives, including a comprehensive smart grid initiative and a full portfolio of conservation programs.

        Customer choice,The ability of energy consumers to choose their supplier, regulatory change, and energy market conditions significantly impact our business. In response, we regularly evaluate our strategies with these goals in mind: to improve our competitive position, toposition. We actively anticipate and adapt to the business environment and regulatory changes andthat impact our industry. We are committed to maintainmaintaining a strong balance sheet and investment-grade credit quality.

        We are constantly reevaluating our strategies
29


Table of Contents

quality by making disciplined investment and might consider:

    acquiring or developing additional generating facilities and gas propertiescapital management decisions to support our merchant energy business,
    renovating or extending the life of existing generation facilities,
    mergers or acquisitions of utility or non-utility businesses or assets,strategic initiatives in an efficient and
    sale of assets of one or more businesses.
effective manner.


Business Environment

With the evolving regulatory environment surrounding customer choice, increasing competition, and the growth of our merchant energy business, variousVarious factors affect our financial results. We discuss some of these factors in more detail in theItem 1. Business—Competition section. We also discuss these various factors in theForward Looking Statements andItem 1A. Risk Factors sections.

        OverThroughout 2008, volatility in the last several years,financial markets intensified, leading to dramatic declines in equity and commodity prices and substantially reduced liquidity in the energycredit markets. Most equity indices declined significantly, the cost of credit default swaps and bond spreads increased substantially, and credit markets have beeneffectively ceased to be accessible for all but the most highly volatile with significant changesrated borrowers. In 2009 and 2010, markets in naturalwhich we operate were affected by declining prices for power, gas, power, oil, coal, and emission allowance prices. The volatilitycapacity. We discuss the impact of the energy markets impactsdeclining commodity prices on our credit portfolio,future earnings in more detail in theGeneration Results section.

        During 2009 and 2010, we improved our liquidity and reduced our business risk in response to these market events. We discuss our liquidity and collateral requirements in theFinancial Condition section. We continue to actively manage our credit portfoliorisk to attempt to reduce the impact of a potential counterparty default. We discuss our customer (counterparty) credit and other risks in more detail in theMarket Risk Management section.

        In addition, the volatility of the energy marketsCompetition also impacts our liquidity and collateral requirements.business. We discuss our liquidity in theFinancial Condition section.

Competition

We face competition in the sale of electricity, natural gas, and coal in wholesale energy markets and to retail customers.

        Various states have moved to restructure their retail electricity and gas markets. The pace of deregulation in these states varies based on historical moves to competition and responses to recent market events. While many states continue to support or expand retail competition and industry restructuring, other states that were considering deregulation have slowed their plans or postponed consideration. In addition, other states are reconsidering deregulation.

        Specifically, legislatures in a number of states are considering, to varying degrees, legislation currently to either eliminate or expand retail choice programs. In addition, many states have initiated proceedings to reconsider the method of wholesale procurement for meeting their utilities' default/provider-of-last-resort requirements. Both the reconsideration of retail choice and possible new methodologies for wholesale procurement could affect our customer supply group's future opportunities to service commercial and industrial customers and the ability to provide wholesale products to utilities. The outcome of these efforts cannot be predicted, but they could have a material effect on our financial results.

        All BGE electricity and gas customers have the option to purchase electricity and gas from alternate suppliers.

        We discuss merchant competition in more detail inItem 1. Business—Competition section.

        The impacts of electric deregulationcompetition on BGE in Maryland are discussed inItem 1. Business—Baltimore Gas and Electric Company—Electric Business—Electric Competition section.

Regulation—Maryland

Maryland PSC

In addition to electric restructuring,competition, which is discussedwe discuss inItem 1. Business—Baltimore Gas and Electric Company—Electric Business—Electric Competition section, regulation by the Maryland PSCPublic Service Commission (Maryland PSC) significantly influences BGE's businesses. The Maryland PSC determines the rates that BGE can charge customers of its electric distribution and gas businesses. The Maryland PSC incorporates into BGE's standard offer service rates the transmission rates determined by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). BGE's electric rates are unbundled inshown on customer billings to showas separate components for delivery service (i.e. base rates), electric supply (commodity charge)charge and transmission), transmission, a universal service surcharge, and certain taxes.taxes and surcharges. The rates for BGE's regulated gas business continue to consist of a delivery charge (base rate)rates as well as certain taxes and surcharges) and a commodity charge.

Purchase of Supplier Receivables

Effective July 15, 2010, BGE, pursuant to Maryland PSC requirements, began to purchase receivables at a discount from third party competitive energy suppliers that provide our customers electricity and/or gas. The discount rate applied to the receivables is a regulated rate which is intended to cover BGE's costs associated with purchasing these receivables, such as uncollectibles, and is subject to an annual true-up to reflect actual costs.

Order Approving Membership Interest Sale in CENG to EDF

In October 2009, the Maryland PSC issued an order approving the sale of a 49.99% membership interest in CENG to EDF subject to the following conditions, with which both Constellation Energy and EDF complied or are complying:

    Constellation Energy funded a one-time, $100 per customer distribution rate credit for BGE residential customers totaling $112.4 million in the fourth quarter of 2009. Constellation Energy made a $66 million equity contribution to BGE in December 2009 to fund the after-tax amount of the rate credit as ordered by the Maryland PSC.
    Constellation Energy was required to make a $250 million cash capital contribution to BGE by no later than June 30, 2010. Constellation Energy made this equity contribution to BGE in December 2009.
    BGE will not pay common dividends to Constellation Energy if:
    after the dividend payment, BGE's equity ratio would be below 48% as calculated pursuant to the Maryland PSC's ratemaking precedents, or
    BGE's senior unsecured credit rating is rated by two of the three major credit rating agencies below investment grade.
    BGE was prohibited from filing an electric and/or gas distribution rate case at any time prior to January 2010 and was ordered not to file a subsequent electric and/or gas distribution rate case until January 2011. Any rate increase in the first electric distribution rate case was capped at 5% as agreed to by Constellation Energy in its 2008 settlement with the State of Maryland and the Maryland PSC. In May 2010, BGE filed an electric and gas distribution rate case with the Maryland PSC and the Maryland PSC issued its order on the case in December 2010. We discuss this matter further in theBase Rates section below.
    Constellation Energy is limited to allocating no more than 31% of its holding company costs to BGE until the Maryland PSC reviews such cost allocations in the context of BGE's next rate case.
    Constellation Energy and BGE implemented "ring fencing" measures in February 2010 designed to provide bankruptcy protection and credit rating separation of BGE from Constellation Energy. Such measures include the formation of a new special purpose subsidiary by Constellation Energy to hold all of the common equity interests in BGE.

Senate Bills 1 and 400Maryland Settlement Agreement

In March 2008, Constellation Energy, BGE, and a Constellation Energy affiliate entered into a settlement agreement with the State of Maryland, the Maryland PSC and certain State of


30


Table of Contents

Maryland officials to resolve pending litigation and to settle other prior legal, regulatory, and legislative issues. On April 24, 2008, the Governor of Maryland signed enabling legislation, which became effective on June 2006,1, 2008. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement:

    Each party acknowledged that the agreements adopted in 1999 relating to Maryland's electric restructuring law are final and binding and the Maryland PSC closed ongoing proceedings relating to the 1999 settlement.
    BGE provided its residential electric customers approximately $189 million in the form of a one-time $170 per customer rate credit. We recorded a reduction to "Electric revenues" on our and BGE's Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss) during the second quarter of 2008 and reduced customers' bills by the amount of the credit between September and December 2008.
    BGE customers were relieved of the potential future liability for decommissioning Calvert Cliffs Unit 1 and Unit 2, scheduled to begin no earlier than 2034 and 2036, respectively, and are no longer obligated to pay a total of $520 million, in 1993 dollars adjusted for inflation, pursuant to the 1999 Maryland PSC order regarding the deregulation of electric generation. BGE will continue to collect the $18.7 million annual nuclear decommissioning charge from all electric customers through 2016 and continue to rebate this amount to residential electric customers, as previously required by Maryland Senate Bill 1, which was enacted which among other things:

      imposed rate stabilization measures that (i) capped rate increases by BGE for residential SOS service at 15% from July 1, 2006 to May 31, 2007, (ii) gave residential SOS customers the option fromin June 1, 2007 until December 31, 2007 of paying a full market rate or choosing a short term rate stabilization plan in order to provide a smooth transition to market rates without adversely affecting the creditworthiness of BGE, and (iii) provided for full market rates for all residential SOS service starting January 1, 2008;2006.
      allowed BGE to recover the costs deferred from July 1, 2006 to May 31, 2007 from its customers over a period not to exceed 10 years, on terms and conditions to be determined by the Maryland PSC, including through the issuance of rate stabilization bonds that securitize the deferred costs; and
      required BGE to reduce residential electric rates by approximately $39 million per year for 10 years, beginning January 1, 2007, through suspension of theresumed collection of the residential return componentportion of the administrative charge for SOS serviceincluded in Standard Offer Service (SOS) rates, which had been eliminated under Senate Bill 1, on June 1, 2008 through May 31, 2007 and by providing2010 without having to rebate it to all residential electric customers a credit equal to the amounts collected from all BGE customers for the nuclear decommissioning trust for Calvert Cliffs. We provide further details inItem 1. Business—Cost for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities section and inItem 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis—Regulated Electric Business—Senate Bill 1 Credits section.

              In connection with these provisions of Senate Bill 1:

        In May 2007, the Maryland PSC approved a plan to allow residential electric customers to defer the transition to full market rates fromcustomers. This totaled $37.3 million over this period. Starting June 1, 2007 to January 1, 2008. The 4 percent of customers who chose to defer will repay the deferred amounts over a twenty-one month period starting April 1, 2008 without interest.
        In June 2007, a subsidiary of2010, BGE issued an aggregate principal amount of $623.2 million of rate stabilization bonds to recover costs relating to the residential rate deferral from July 1, 2006 to May 31, 2007. We discuss the rate stabilization bond issuance in more detail inNote 9.
        In June 2007, the Maryland PSC required BGE to reinstate collection of the residential return component of the POLR administration charge in POLR rates and to providehas provided all residential electric customers a credit for the residential return component of the administrative charge. This credit will be given to customers through December 31, 2016.

              In connection

      Any increase in electric distribution revenue awarded in the first electric distribution rate case filed by BGE after the settlement was capped at 5% with implementing thecertain exceptions. The agreement does not govern or affect BGE's ability to recover costs associated with gas rates, federally approved transmission rates and charges, electric riders, tax increases, or increases associated with standard offer service power supply auctions.
      Effective June 1, 2008, BGE implemented revised depreciation rates for regulatory and financial reporting purposes. The revised rates reduced depreciation expense by approximately $39$14 million in credits2008 and $25.2 million in 2009 without impacting distribution rates charged to residentialcustomers.
      Effective June 1, 2008, Maryland laws governing investments in companies that own and operate regulated gas and electric customers discussed above, BGE and Calvert Cliffs had notified the Maryland PSC that they had entered into a standstill agreement with the Attorney General of the State of Marylandutilities were amended to make them less restrictive with respect to potential challengescertain capital stock acquisition transactions.
      Constellation Energy elected two independent directors to the provisionsBoard of Senate Bill 1 relating toDirectors of BGE within the credits. In January 2008, BGE and Calvert Cliffs providedrequired six months from the Attorney General with notice of their terminationexecution of the standstill agreement and their intent to file a federal action to enforce their rights under the 1999 Maryland electric deregulation settlement and to challenge the constitutionality of the residential customer credits set forth in Senate Bill 1. We may incur significant costs to litigate this action and we cannot provide any assurances that it will be resolved in our favor. If the action is resolved in a manner adverse to us, which may include a court determining that Senate Bill 1 appropriately required the residential rate credits or overturning aspects of the 1999 electric deregulation settlement, the impact on our, or BGE's, financial results could be material.

              Further, in April 2007, Senate Bill 400 was enacted, which made certain modifications to Senate Bill 1. Pursuant to Senate Bill 400, the Maryland PSC was required to initiate several studies, including studies relating to stranded costs, the costs and benefits of various options for reregulation, and the structure of the electric industry in Maryland. In addition, the Maryland PSC has indicated that they are studying the relationship between Constellation Energy and BGE.

              In December 2007, the Maryland PSC issued an interim report addressing the costs and benefits of various options for reregulation and recommending actions to be taken to address an anticipated shortage of generation and transmission capacity in Maryland, which included implementation of demand response initiatives and requiring utilities to enter into long-term power purchase contracts with suppliers.

              In January 2008, the Maryland PSC issued another interim report that indicated that the Maryland PSC would initiate proceedings into payments made by BGE customers for stranded costs resulting from BGE's transfer of generation assets to certain Constellation Energy affiliates in connection with deregulation and into Constellation Energy's management of its nuclear decommissioning funds. This interim report also recommended that the Maryland legislature enact legislation to provide the Maryland PSC with the authority to regulate nuclear decommissioning funds and consider legislation that would provide the Maryland PSC with the authority to consider reallocation of the liability for nuclear decommissioning among Constellation Energy, BGE and customers or to otherwise order relief for customers. Similarly, the interim report also recommended that the Maryland legislature consider legislation to order relief for customers depending on the outcome of the Maryland PSC's stranded cost proceeding.

              The Maryland PSC is required to issue a final report in December 2008. We cannot at this time predict the ultimate outcome of these inquiries, studies, and recommendations or their actual effect on our, or BGE's financial results, but it could be material. In addition, one or more parties may challenge in court one or more provisions of Senate Bills 1 and 400. The outcome of any challenges and the uncertainty that could result cannot be predicted.

              We discuss the market risk of our regulated electric business in more detail in theMarket Risk section.

      agreement.

    Base Rates

    Base rates are the rates the Maryland PSC allows BGE to charge its customers for the cost of providing them delivery service, plus a profit. BGE has both electric base rates and gas base rates. Higher electric base rates apply during the summer when the demand for electricity is higher. Gas base rates are not affected by seasonal changes.

            BGE may ask the Maryland PSC to increase base rates from time to time. In 2008, BGE planstime, subject to file a combination electric and gas base rate case.limitations in the Maryland PSC's October 2009 order approving our transaction with EDF. The Maryland PSC historically has allowed BGE to increase base rates to recover its utility plant investment and operating costs, plus a profit. Generally, rate increases improve the earnings of our regulated business because they allow us to collect more revenue. However, rate increases are normally granted based on historical data and those increases may not always keep pace with increasing costs. Other parties may petition the Maryland PSC to decrease base rates.

            BGE's most recently approvedIn May 2010, BGE filed an application for an increase in its electric and gas base rates with the Maryland PSC. In August 2010, BGE updated its application to request an increase of $47.2 million and $30.4 million in its electric and gas base rates, respectively. The request was based upon an 8.99% rate of return with an 11.65% return on equity and a 52% equity ratio. While BGE demonstrated the need for a $92.3 million increase in electric base rates, distribution rate base was 9.4% (approvedrevenues awarded to BGE in 1993). BGE's most recently approved return on gas rate base was 8.49% (approved in 2005).the case were subject to a 5% cap pursuant to the terms of the 2008 settlement agreement with the State of Maryland as well as the Maryland PSC's order approving the EDF transaction.

            InOn December 2005,6, 2010, the Maryland PSC issued an abbreviated order grantingauthorizing BGE to increase electric distribution rates by no more than $31.0 million and increase gas distribution rates by no more than $9.8 million for service rendered on or after December 4, 2010. The electric distribution rate increase was based upon an 8.06% rate of return with a $35.6 million annual9.86% return on equity and a 52% equity ratio. The gas distribution rate increase in its gas base rates. In December 2006,was based upon a 7.90% rate of return with a 9.56% return on equity and a 52% equity ratio. BGE implemented the Baltimore City Circuit Court upheldabbreviated order, will evaluate the comprehensive rate order. However, certain parties have filed an appeal with the Court of Special Appeals. We cannot provide assuranceorder that the Maryland PSC's orderPSC will not be reversedissue in whole or part or that certain issuesthe near future and will not be remanded toassess its alternatives. BGE cannot predict the Maryland PSC for reconsideration.outcome of this assessment.

    Revenue Decoupling

    Beginning in 2008, BGE willThe Maryland PSC has allowed us to record a monthly adjustment to itsour electric distribution revenues from residential and small commercial customers since 2008 and for the majority of our large commercial and industrial customers since February 2009 to eliminate the effect of abnormal weather and usage patterns per customer on itsour electric distribution volumes, thereby recovering a specified dollar amount of distribution revenues per customer, by customer class, regardless of changes in accordance with Maryland PSC requirements.consumption levels. This means that BGE's monthly electricBGE recognizes revenues at


    31


    Table of Contents

    Maryland PSC-approved levels per customer, regardless of what actual distribution revenues from residential and small commercial customers will be based on weather and usage that is considered normalvolumes were for the month.a billing period. Therefore, while these revenues are affected by customer growth, andthey will not be affected by actual weather or usage conditions. We then bill or credit impacted customers in subsequent months for the difference between approved revenue levels under revenue decoupling and actual customer billings. We have a similar revenue decoupling mechanism in our gas business.


    Demand Response and Advanced Metering Programs

    In order to implement advanced metering and demand response programs, BGE will deferdefers costs associated with theseits demand response programs as a regulatory asset and recoverrecovers these costs from customers in future periods.

            In August 2010, the Maryland PSC approved a comprehensive smart grid initiative for BGE which includes the planned installation of 2 million residential and commercial electric and gas smart meters at an expected total cost of approximately $480 million. The Maryland PSC's approval ordered BGE to defer the associated incremental costs, depreciation and amortization, and an appropriate return, in a regulatory asset until such time as a cost-effective advanced metering system is delivered to customers. Under a grant from the United States Department of Energy (DOE) BGE is a recipient of $200 million in federal funding for its smart grid and other related initiatives. This grant allows BGE to be reimbursed for smart grid and other expenditures up to $200 million, substantially reducing the total cost of these initiatives.

            We discuss the advanced metering and demand responseBGE's electric load management programs in more detail inItem 1. Business—Baltimore Gas and Electric Company—Electric Load Management. We discuss the associated regulatory assets inNote 6 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

    Electric Commodity and Transmission ChargesStandard Offer Service

    BGE is obligated by the Maryland PSC to provide market-based standard offer service (SOS) to all of its electric commoditycustomers who elect not to select a competitive energy supplier. The SOS rates charged recover BGE's wholesale power supply costs and transmission charges (standard offer service), includinginclude an administrative fee. The administrative fee includes a shareholder return component and an incremental cost component. However, BGE is required under the impact of the enactmentterms of Senate Bill 1 to provide all residential electric customers a credit for the residential return component of the administrative fee. This credit will be given to customers through December 31, 2016. Currently, BGE is involved in a Maryland are discussed inBusiness Environment—Regulation—Maryland—Senate Bills 1 and 400 section.PSC proceeding to determine the future, on-going structure of the SOS administrative fee charged to all SOS customers.

    Gas Commodity Charge

    BGE charges its gas customers separately for the natural gas they purchase. The price BGE charges for the natural gas is based on a market-based rates incentive mechanism approved by the Maryland PSC. We discuss market-based rates in more detail in theRegulated Gas Business—Gas Cost AdjustmentsBusiness section and inNote 6.6 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

    Potential Reliability and Quality of Service Standards

    The State of Maryland is considering legislative and regulatory changes that would impose new reliability and quality of service standards on electric and gas companies, as well as penalties for failure to meet those standards. We cannot at this time predict the final outcome of this process or how such outcome may affect our, or BGE's, financial results.

    Federal Regulation

    FERC

    The FERC has jurisdiction over various aspects of our business, including electric transmission and wholesale natural gas and electricity sales. BGE transmission rates are updated annually based on a formula methodology approved by FERC. The rates also include transmission investment incentives approved by FERC in a number of orders issued in July and November ofcovering various new transmission investment projects since 2007. We believe that FERC's continued commitment to fair and efficient wholesale energy markets should continue to result in improvements to competitive markets across various regions.

            Since 1997, operation of BGE's transmission system has been under the authority of PJM Interconnection (PJM), the Regional Transmission Organization (RTO) for the Mid-Atlantic region, pursuant to FERC oversight. As the transmission operator, PJM operatesadministers the energy markets and conducts day-to-day operations of the bulk power system. The liability of transmission owners, including BGE, and power generators is limited to those damages caused by the gross negligence of such entities.

            In addition to PJM, RTOs exist in other regions of the country such as the Midwest, New York, Texas, and New England. In additionSimilar to PJM, these RTOs also administer the energy market for their region and are responsible for operation of the transmission system and responsibility for transmission system reliability, these RTOs also operate energy markets for their region pursuant to FERC's oversight.reliability. Our merchant energy business participatesGeneration and NewEnergy businesses participate in these regional energy markets. These markets are continuing to develop, and revisions to market structure are subject to review and approval by FERC. We cannot predict the outcome of any reviews at this time. However, changes to the structure of these markets could have a material effect on our financial results.

    FERC Initiatives

    Ongoing initiatives at FERC have included a review of its methodology for the granting of market-based rate authority to sellers of electricity. FERC has established interim tests that will be usedit uses to determine the extent to which companies may have market power in certain regions. Where FERC finds that market power is found to exist, FERCexists, it may require companies to implement measures to mitigate the market power in order to maintain market-based rate authority. We believe that our entities selling wholesale power continue to satisfy FERC's test for determining whether to grant a public utility market-based rate authority.

            In November 2004, FERC eliminated through and out transmission rates between the Midwest Independent System Operator (MISO) and PJM and put in place Seams Elimination Charge/Cost Adjustment/Assignment (SECA) transition rates, which are paid by the transmission customers of MISO and


    32


    Table of Contents

    PJM and allocated among the various transmission owners in PJM and MISO. The SECA transition rates were in effect from December 1, 2004 through March 31, 2006. FERC set for hearing the various compliance filings that established the level of the SECA rates and has indicated that the SECA rates are being recovered from the MISO and PJM transmission customers subject to refund by the MISO and PJM transmission owners.

            We are a recipient of SECA payments, payer of SECA charges, and supplier to whom such charges may be shifted. Administrative hearings regarding the SECA charges concluded in May 2006, and an initial decision from the FERC administrative law judge (ALJ) was issued in August 2006. The decision of the ALJ generally found in favor of reducing the overall SECA liability. The decision, if upheld, is expected to significantly reduce the overall SECA liability at issueIn May 2010, FERC issued an order approving in this proceeding. However,part and reversing in part the ALJ also alloweddecision. The FERC order results in additional SECA charges to be shifted to upstream suppliers, subject to certain adjustments. Therefore, certain charges could be shifted to our wholesale marketing, risk management, and trading operation. Thisliabilities being imposed on us. In June 2010, we filed a request for rehearing of the FERC order on the ALJ decision, will be reviewed byas did other interested parties. The rehearing requests are pending at FERC. We are unable to predict the timing or final outcomeIn July 2010, BGE filed a petition for review of FERC's SECA rate proceeding. However, as the amounts collected underapproval of the SECA rates are subjectmethodology, and this appeal is being held in abeyance pending action by FERC on the pending rehearing requests. In the interim, PJM and MISO have made filings at FERC to refundcomply with the May 2010 decision and to impose charges accordingly. Depending on the ultimate outcome, of the proceeding establishing SECA rates is uncertain, the result of this proceeding may have a material effect on our financial results.

    Capacity Markets

    In April 2006, FERC issued an initial order approving PJM's proposal to restructure itsgeneral, capacity market which establishesdesign revisions are routinely proposed and considered on an ongoing basis. Such changes are subject to FERC's review and approval. Currently, we cannot predict the method by which we are paid for making generating plant capacity availableoutcome of these proceedings or the possible effect on our, or BGE's, financial results.

            Through 2008 and 2009, PJM made several filings at FERC proposing various revisions to PJM. Theits capacity market, or Reliability Pricing Model (RPM) was approved by, including the determination of the cost-of-new-entry (CONE), which is an important component in determining the price paid to capacity resources in PJM. PJM also proposed revisions relating to the participation of energy efficiency and demand resources, and market power and mitigation rules. Some of these matters are still pending at FERC. While recent RPM design changes have not yet had a material effect on our financial results, we cannot predict the outcome of the issues still pending or on any capacity market design changes that result from new regulatory requirements. Such changes could have a material impact on our financial results.

            In May 2008, five state public service commissions, including the Maryland PSC, consumer advocates, and others filed a complaint against PJM at the FERC, in December 2006 after settlement proceedings. FERC in June and November 2007 upheldalleging that the RPM settlement in responseproduced unreasonable prices during the period from June 1, 2008 through May 31, 2011. The complaint requested that FERC establish a refund effective date of June 1, 2008, reject the results of the 2007/08 through 2010/11 RPM capacity auction results, and significantly reduce prices for capacity beginning as of June 1, 2008 through 2011/12. FERC dismissed the complaint and denied rehearing, and ultimately the Maryland PSC and New Jersey Board of Public Utilities appealed the case to requests for rehearing. An appeal of FERC's decisions on RPM was filed in January 2008 in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Currently, weColumbia. In February 2011, the court denied the petition for review and held that FERC adequately explained why the RPM auction structure was just and reasonable. The petitioners could seek to appeal the court's decision to the United States Supreme Court. We cannot predict with certainty what effectat this time whether the resultspetitioners will seek an appeal or the outcome of these challenges will have on our, or BGE's, financial results.any further proceedings.

            AlsoIn April 2009, the Attorney General of Connecticut, the Connecticut Department of Public Utilities and Office of Consumer Counsel (together, the Connecticut Parties) filed complaints at FERC alleging improper energy bidding behavior since December 1, 2006 by generators located in January 2008New York that also received capacity payments within ISO-New England. In May 2009, the Connecticut Parties filed an amended complaint asserting that Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc. (CCG) and others received capacity payments while never intending to perform as capacity resources. The revised allegations assert that certain generators engaged in connection"economic withholding" by submitting energy bids at or near the offer cap. Since December 2006, CCG has received approximately $7 million in payments for capacity offered into ISO-New England associated with RPM, PJM filed revisionsConstellation Energy's previously wholly owned nuclear facilities located in NY. In August 2009, FERC issued an order setting this matter for a public hearing before an ALJ to itsdetermine the intent of the capacity market rules to reflect increased construction costs for new entry of generation (CONE). CONE is usedsuppliers (including CCG) in determining the price paid to capacity resources that clearmaking their energy offers in ISO-New England. CCG actively participated in the PJM capacity auction.proceeding, and in September 2010 the ALJ issued an Initial Decision finding that the Connecticut Parties failed to prove their case and dismissed the complaint against CCG. The outcome of thisInitial Decision is pending filing atbefore FERC is uncertain, but it could have a material effect on our financial results.for approval or modification.


            Three major, high-voltage transmission lines have been announced that could enhance significantly the transfer capacity of the PJM transmission system from west to east. The siting process, eitherboth in the states orand at FERC, is uncertain, as is the likelihood that one or more of the transmission lines will be ultimately constructed. The construction of the transmission lines, which could depress both capacity and energy prices for generation located in Maryland and elsewhere in the eastern part of PJM, could have a material effect on our financial results.

            OtherIn addition to legal challenges to capacity markets and regulatory advocacy before FERC seeking to revise the capacity market changesstructures, states are routinely proposed and considered on an ongoing basis. Such changes will beseeking more direct ways to affect the results of wholesale capacity markets. In January 2011, the New Jersey legislature adopted legislation that would provide for guaranteed cost recovery for the development of up to 2,000 MWs of new base load or mid-merit generation in exchange for the requirement that the new generation clear in the PJM capacity market. Similarly, the Maryland PSC issued a draft Request for Proposals that, subject to FERC's reviewan evidentiary hearing confirming the reliability need for such resources, contemplates having Maryland ratepayers fund the development of new generation and approval. We cannot predictto require that eligible new generation clear in the PJM capacity market. Such state efforts are intended to


    33


    Table of Contents

    depress capacity prices, and are subject to legal and regulatory challenge. Depending on the outcome of these proceedings or the possiblechallenges, these state efforts could have a material effect on our or BGE's, financial results at this time.results.

    NERC Reliability Standards

    In compliance with the Energy Policy Act of 2005, FERC has approved the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) as the national energy reliability organization. NERC will be responsible for the development and enforcement of mandatory reliability and cyber-security standards for the wholesale electric power system. We are responsible for complying with the standards in the regions in which we operate. NERC will have the ability to assess financial penalties for noncompliance, which could be material.

            Concerns over the security of the country's energy infrastructure could lead to additional future rules or regulations related to the operation and security requirements of our generating facilities and electric and gas transmission and distribution systems, which could have a material impact on our operations and financial results.

    Financial Regulatory Reform

    The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) was enacted in July 2010. While the Dodd-Frank Act is focused primarily on the regulation and oversight of financial institutions, it also provides for a new regulatory regime for derivatives, including mandatory clearing of certain swaps, exchange trading, margin requirements, and other transparency requirements. The Dodd-Frank Act, however, also preserves the ability of end users in our industry to hedge their risks, which we believe results in the new derivatives requirements not being applicable to us for most of our activities. However, there will be several key rulemakings to implement the derivatives requirements, which, depending on the final scope of the regulations, could attempt to impose significant obligations on us nonetheless. Final regulations may address collateral requirements and exchange margin cash postings, which if applicable to us despite being an end user of derivatives, could have the effect of increasing collateral requirements or the amount of exchange margin cash postings in lieu of letters of credit currently issued on over-the-counter contracts. These regulations could also result in additional transactional and compliance costs to the extent they apply to us, and could impact market liquidity.

            In addition to new regulation over derivatives, the Dodd-Frank Act amends the Sarbanes-Oxley Act to permanently exempt nonaccelerated filers, including BGE, from the requirement to obtain an audit report on internal controls over financial reporting.

    Market Oversight

    Regulatory agencies that have jurisdiction over our businesses, including the FERC and Commodity Future Trading Commission (CFTC), possess broad enforcement and investigative authority to ensure well functioning markets and to prohibit market manipulation or violations of the agencies' rules or orders. These agencies also possess significant civil penalty authority, including in the case of FERC and the CFTC, the authority to impose a penalty of up to $1 million per day per violation. We are committed to a culture of compliance and ensuring compliance with all applicable rules, laws and orders. Nonetheless, the regulatory agencies engage in either public or non-public investigations in response to allegations of wrongdoing and we may be involved in certain market activities that become subject to investigations. Even where no wrongdoing is found, the process of participating in a regulatory investigation could have a material effect on our business.

    Weather

    Merchant Energy BusinessGeneration and NewEnergy Businesses

    Weather conditions in the different regions of North America influence the financial results of our merchant energy business.Generation and NewEnergy businesses. Weather conditions can affect the supply of and demand for electricity, natural gas, and fuels. Changes in energy supply and demand may impact the price of these energy commodities in both the spot market and the forward market, which may affect our results in any given period. Typically, demand for electricity and its price are higher in the summer and the winter, when weather is more extreme. The demand for and price of natural gas and oil are higher in the winter. However, all regions of North America typically do not experience extreme weather conditions at the same time, thus we are not typically exposed to the effects of extreme weather in all parts of our business at once.

    BGE

    Weather affects the demand for electricity and gas for our regulated businesses. Very hot summers and very cold winters increase demand. Mild weather reduces demand. Weather affects residential sales more than commercial and industrial sales, which are mostly affected by business needs for electricity and gas. The Maryland PSC has approved revenue decoupling mechanisms which allow BGE to record monthly adjustments to the majority of our regulated electric and gas business distribution revenues to eliminate the effect of abnormal weather and usage patterns. We discuss this further in theRegulation—Maryland PSC—Maryland—Revenue Decoupling, Regulated Electric Business—Revenue Decoupling andRegulated Gas Business—Gas Revenue Decoupling sections.

    Other Factors

    A number of other factors significantly influence the level and volatility of prices for energy commodities and related derivative products for our merchant energyNewEnergy business. These factors include:

      seasonal, daily, and hourly changes in demand,
      number of market participants,
      extreme peak demands,
      available supply resources,
      transportation and transmission availability and reliability within and between regions,
      location of our generating facilities relative to the location of our load-serving obligations,
      implementation of new market rules governing operations of regional power pools,


    34


    Table of Contents

      procedures used to maintain the integrity of the physical electricity system during extreme conditions,
      changes in the nature and extent of federal and state regulations, and
      international supply and demand.

            These factors can affect energy commodity and derivative prices in different ways and to different degrees. These effects may vary throughout the country as a result of regional differences in:

      weather conditions,
      market liquidity,
      capability and reliability of the physical electricity and gas systems,
      state and local environmental regulations,
      local transportation systems, and
      the nature and extent of electricity deregulation.competition.

            Other factors also impact the demand for electricity and gas in our regulated businesses. These factors include the number of customers and usage per customer during a given period. We use these terms later in our discussions of regulated electric and gas operations. In those sections, we discuss how these and other factors affected electric and gas sales during the periods presented.

            The number of customers in a given period is affected by new home and apartment construction and by the number of businesses in our service territory.

            Usage per customer refers to all other items impacting customer sales that cannot be measured separately. These factors include the strength of the economy in our service territory. When the economy is healthy and expanding, customers tend to consume more electricity and gas. Conversely, during an economic downturn, our customers tend to consume less electricity and gas.

    Environmental Matters and Legal Proceedings

    We discuss details of our environmental matters inNote 12 to Consolidated Financial Statements andItem 1. Business—Environmental Matters section. We discuss details of our legal proceedings inNote 12 to Consolidated Financial Statements. Some of this information is about costs that may be material to our financial results.

    Accounting Standards Adopted and Issued

    We discuss recently adopted and issued accounting standards inNote 1 to Consolidated Financial Statements.


    Critical Accounting Policies

    Our discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations is based on our consolidated financial statements that were prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Management makes estimates and assumptions when preparing financial statements.


    These estimates and assumptions affect various matters, including:

      our reported amounts of revenues and expenses in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss),
      our reported amounts of assets and liabilities in our Consolidated Balance Sheets, and
      our disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities.

            These estimates involve judgments with respect to numerous factors that are difficult to predict and are beyond management's control. As a result, actual amounts could materially differ from these estimates.

            Management believes the following accounting policies discussed below represent critical accounting policies as defined by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The SEC defines critical accounting policies as those that are both most important to the portrayal of a company's financial condition and results of operations and require management's most difficult, subjective, or complex judgment, often as a result of the need to make estimates about the effect of matters that are inherently uncertain and may change in subsequent periods. We discuss our significant accounting policies, including those that do not require management to make difficult, subjective, or complex judgments or estimates, inNote 1 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

    Accounting for Derivatives and Hedging Activities

    Our merchant energy business originatesWe utilize a variety of derivative instruments in order to manage commodity price risk, interest rate risk, and acquires contracts for energy, other energy-related commodities, and related derivatives. We record merchant energy business revenues using two methodsforeign currency risk. Because of accounting: accrual accounting and mark-to-market accounting. Thethe extensive nature of the accounting requirements that govern both accounting treatment and documentation, as well as the complexity of the transactions within the scope of these requirements, management is required to exercise judgment in several areas, including the following:

      identification of derivatives,
      selection of accounting treatment for derivatives, are governed by Statement
      valuation of Financial Accounting Standard (SFAS) No. 133,Accounting for Derivative Instrumentsderivatives, and Hedging Activities,
      impact of uncertainty.

            as amended, and applying those requirements involvesAs discussed in more detail below, the exercise of management's judgment in evaluating these provisions, as well as related implementation guidance and applying those requirements to complex contracts in a variety of commodities and markets. We record all derivatives subject to the accounting requirements of SFAS No. 133 as "Derivative assets or liabilities" inareas materially impacts our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Within derivative assets and liabilities, we include derivative contracts subject to mark-to-market accounting and derivative contracts that qualify for designation as hedges under SFAS No. 133.

            Many fundamental customer contracts in our business, such as those associated with our load-serving activities, must be accounted for on an accrual basis. We may economically hedge these contracts with derivatives and elect cash-flow hedge accounting or apply the normal purchase and normal sale exception in order to match more closely the timing of the recognition of earnings from these transactions. We make these elections because we believe that accrual accounting provides the most transparent presentation to our shareholders of these business activities. If our commercial transactions or related hedges meet the definition of a derivative, we must comply with the provisions of SFAS No. 133 in order to use cash-flow hedge accounting or the normal purchase and normal sale exception. Qualifying for either of these accounting treatments requires ongoing compliance with specific, detailed documentation and other requirements that may be unrelated to the economics of the transactions or how the associated risks are managed.financial statements. While we believe we have appropriate controls in place to comply with theseapply the derivative accounting requirements, the failure to meet all of thosethese requirements, even inadvertently, may result in disqualifyingcould require the use of thesea different accounting treatmentstreatment for those transactions for anythe affected period until all such requirements are satisfied.

            The exercise of management's judgment in using cash-flow hedge accounting or electing the normal purchase and sale exception versus mark-to-market accounting, including compliance with all of the associated qualification and documentation requirements, materially impacts our financial results with respect to timing of the recognition of earnings.transactions. In addition, interpretations of SFAS No. 133 couldthese accounting requirements continue to evolve. If there is aevolve, and future change in interpretation or a failure to meet the qualification and documentation requirements, contracts that currently are excluded from the provisions of SFAS No. 133 under the normal purchase and normal sale exception or for which changes in fair valueaccounting requirements also could affect our financial statements materially. We discuss derivatives and hedging activities in more detail inNote 1 andNote 13 to Consolidated Financial Statements.

    Identification of Derivatives

    We must evaluate new and existing transactions and agreements to determine whether they are recordedderivatives or if they contain embedded derivatives. Identifying derivatives requires us to exercise judgment in other comprehensive income under cash-flow hedgeinterpreting the definition of a derivative and applying that definition to each individual contract. If a contract is not a derivative, we cannot apply derivative accounting, could be deemed to no longer qualify for those accounting treatments. If that were to occur, normal purchase and normal sale contracts could be required to be recorded onwe generally must record the balance sheet at fair value with changeseffects of the contract in value recorded in the income statement, and changes in value of derivatives previously designated as cash-flow hedges could be required to be recorded in the income statement rather than in other comprehensive income.

            We record revenues and fuel and purchased energy expenses from the saleour financial statements upon delivery or purchase of energy, energy-related products, and energy servicessettlement under the accrual method of accounting. In contrast, if a contract is a derivative, we must apply derivative accounting,


    35


    Table of Contents

    which provides for several possible accounting intreatments as discussed more fully underAccounting Treatment below. As a result, the period when we deliverrequired accounting treatment and its impact on our financial statements can vary substantially depending upon whether a contract is a derivative or receive energy commodities, products, and services, or settle contracts. a non-derivative.

    Accounting Treatment

    We use accrualare permitted several possible accounting treatments for our merchant energy and other nonregulated business transactions, including the generation or purchase and sale of electricity, gas, and coal as part of our physical delivery activities and for power, gas, and coal sales contracts that are not subject to mark-to-market accounting. Contracts that are eligible for accrual accounting include non-derivative transactions and derivatives that meet all of the applicable requirements. Mark-to-market is the default accounting treatment for all derivatives unless they qualify, and we affirmatively designate them, for one of the other accounting treatments. Derivatives designated for any of the other elective accounting treatments must meet specific, restrictive criteria, both at the time of designation and are designated as normal purchases and normal sales of commodities that will be physically delivered. While we generally elect accrual accounting whenever permitted, we sometimes use mark-to-market accounting for physical delivery activities that are managed using economic hedges that do not qualify for accrual accounting.on an ongoing basis.

            The use of permissible accounting treatments for derivatives are:

      mark-to-market,
      cash flow hedge,
      fair value hedge, and
      accrual accounting requires us to analyze contracts to determine whether they are non-derivatives or, if they areunder Normal Purchase/Normal Sale (NPNS).

            Each of the accounting treatments that we use for derivatives whether they meet the requirements for designationaffects our financial statements in substantially different ways as normal purchases and normal sales. For those derivative contracts that do not meet these criteria, we may also analyze whether theysummarized below:


    Recognition and Measurement
    Accounting Treatment
    Balance Sheet
    Income Statement
    Mark-to-market•  Derivative asset or liability recorded at fair value•  Changes in fair value recognized in earnings
    Cash flow hedge•  Derivative asset or liability recorded at fair value

    •  Effective changes in fair value recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income
    •  Ineffective changes in fair value recognized in earnings

    •  Amounts in accumulated other comprehensive income reclassified to earnings when the hedged forecasted transaction affects earnings or becomes probable of not occurring
    Fair value hedge•  Derivative asset or liability recorded at fair value

    •  Book value of hedged asset or liability adjusted for changes in its fair value
    •  Changes in fair value recognized in earnings

    •  Changes in fair value of hedged asset or liability recognized in earnings
    NPNS (accrual)•  Fair value not recorded

    •  Accounts receivable or accounts payable recorded when derivative settles
    •  Changes in fair value not recognized in earnings

    •  Revenue or expense recognized in earnings when underlying physical commodity is sold or consumed

            We exercise judgment in determining which derivatives qualify for a particular accounting treatment, including:

      Cash flow and fair value hedges—determination that all hedge accounting requirements are satisfied, including performing an evaluation of historical forward market price information to determine whether such contracts are expected tothe expectation that the derivative will be highly effective in offsetting changes in cash flows or fair value from the risk being hedged.


      hedged and, for cash flow hedges, the probability that the hedged forecasted transaction will occur.
      Accrual accounting under NPNS—determination that the derivative will result in gross physical delivery of the underlying commodity and will not settle on a net basis.

            We also exercise judgment in selecting the accounting treatment that we believe provides the most transparent presentation of the economics of the underlying transactions. Although contracts may be eligible for hedge accounting or NPNS designation, we are not required to designate and account for all such contracts identically. We generally elect NPNS accrual or hedge accounting for our physical energy delivery activities because accrual accounting more closely aligns the timing of earnings recognition, cash flows, and the underlying business activities. By contrast, we generally apply mark-to-market accounting for risk management and trading activities because changes in fair value more closely reflect the economic performance of the activity. However, we also use mark-to-market accounting for the following activities:

      our competitive retail gas customer supply activities and our fixed quantity competitive retail power customer supply activities for new transactions closed after June 30, 2010, which are managed using economic hedges that we have not designated as cash-flow hedges so as to match the timing of recognition of the earnings impacts of those activities to the greatest extent permissible,
      economic hedges of activities that require accrual accounting for which the related hedge requires mark-to-market methodaccounting, and
      interest rate swaps related to our debt if they do not qualify as fair value hedges.


    36


      Table of Contents

              As a result of making these judgments, the selection of accounting treatments for derivative contracts for which we do not elect to use accrual accounting or hedge accounting.derivatives has a material impact on our financial position and results of operations. These mark-to-market activities include derivative contracts for energyimpacts affect several components of our financial statements, including assets, liabilities, and accumulated other energy-related commodities. Undercomprehensive income (AOCI). Additionally, the mark-to-market methodselection of accounting wetreatment also affects the amount and timing of the recognition of earnings. The following table summarizes these impacts:


      Accounting Treatment
      Effect of Changes
      in Fair Value on:

      Mark-to-market
      Cash Flow Hedge
      Fair Value Hedge
      NPNS
      Assets and liabilities•  Increase or decrease in derivatives•  Increase or decrease in derivatives•  Increase or decrease in derivatives

      •  Decrease or increase in hedged asset or liability
      •  No impact
      AOCI•  No impact•  Increase or decrease for effective portion of hedge•  No impact•  No impact
      Earnings prior to settlement•  Increase or decrease•  Increase or decrease for ineffective portion of hedge•  Increase or decrease for change in derivatives

      •  Decrease or increase for change in hedged asset or liability

      •  Increase or decrease for ineffective portion
      •  No impact
      Earnings at settlement•  No impact•  Amounts in AOCI reclassified to earnings when hedged forecasted transaction affects earnings or when the forecasted transaction becomes probable of not occurring•  Hedged margin recognized in earnings•  Revenue or expense recognized in earnings when underlying physical commodity is sold or consumed

      Valuation

      We record themark-to-market and hedge derivatives at fair value, of these derivatives as assets and liabilities atwhich represents an exit price for the time of contract execution. We recordasset or liability from the changes in these derivative assets and liabilities in our Consolidated Statements of Income.

              Derivative assets and liabilities accounted for under the mark-to-market method of accounting consistperspective of a combination of energy and energy-related derivative contracts.market participant. An exit price is the price at which a market participant could sell an asset or transfer a liability to an unrelated party. While some of these contracts representour derivatives relate to commodities or instruments for which quoted market prices are available from external sources, many other commodities and certainrelated contracts are not actively tradedtraded. Additionally, some contracts include quantities and are valued usingother factors that vary over time. In these cases, we must use modeling techniques to determineestimate expected future market prices, contract quantities, or both.both in order to determine fair value.

              The market prices, quantities, and quantities usedother factors we use to determine fair value reflect management's best estimate considering various factors. However, futureestimates of inputs a market prices and actual quantities will vary from those used in recording the related derivative assets and liabilities, and it is possible that such variations could be material.

      participant would consider. We record valuation adjustments to reflect uncertainties associated with certain estimates inherent in the determination of the fair value of these derivative assets and liabilities. The effect of these uncertainties isthat are not incorporated in market price information or other market-based estimates usedwe use to determine fair value of our mark-to-market energy contracts.value. To the extent possible, we utilize market-based data together with quantitative methods for both measuring the uncertainties for which we record valuation adjustments and determining the level of such adjustments and changes in those levels.

      We describe below the main types of valuation adjustments we record and the process for establishing each. Generally, increasesdiscuss fair value measurements in valuation adjustments reduce our earnings, and decreases in valuation adjustments increase our earnings. However, all or a portion of the effect on earnings of changes in valuation adjustments may be offset by changes in the value of the underlying positions. As discussed below and more fullydetail inNote 113 to Consolidated Financial Statements, our valuation adjustments will be affected by the adoption of SFAS No. 157,Fair Value Measurements, in 2008..

              During 2006, we sold six of our gas-fired facilities. In addition, we own several investments that we do not consider to be core operations. These include financial investments and real estate projects. During 2005, we sold our other nonregulated international investments. We discuss the sales of our gas-fired plants and our international investments in more detail inNote 2.

              Our Merchant Energy,Generation, NewEnergy, Regulated Electric, and Regulated Gas reportable segments are strategic businesses based principally upon regulations, products, and services that require different technologytechnologies and marketing strategies. We evaluate the performance of these segments based on net income. We account for intersegment revenues using market prices. We present aA summary of information by operating segment onis shown in the next page.table below.


      110


      Table of Contents


       
       Reportable Segments
        
        
        
       
       
       Merchant
      Energy
      Business

       Regulated
      Electric
      Business

       Regulated
      Gas
      Business

       Other
      Nonregulated
      Businesses

       Eliminations
       Consolidated
       

       
       
       (In millions)
       
      2007                   
      Unaffiliated revenues $17,545.1 $2,455.6 $943.0 $249.5 $ $21,193.2 
      Intersegment revenues  1,199.4  0.1  19.8  0.3  (1,219.6)  

       
      Total revenues  18,744.5  2,455.7  962.8  249.8  (1,219.6) 21,193.2 
      Depreciation, depletion, and amortization  269.9  187.4  46.8  53.7    557.8 
      Fixed charges  86.9  107.6  30.9  8.6  71.6  305.6 
      Income tax expense (benefit)  332.7  64.6  22.8  8.2    428.3 
      Income from discontinued operations  (0.9)         (0.9)
      Net income (a)  678.3  97.9  28.8  16.5    821.5 
      Segment assets  16,151.1  4,378.4  1,293.6  458.6  (336.0) 21,945.7 
      Capital expenditures  1,178.0  340.0  62.0  85.0    1,665.0 

      2006

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       
      Unaffiliated revenues $16,048.2 $2,115.9 $890.0 $230.8 $ $19,284.9 
      Intersegment revenues  1,118.0    9.5  0.2  (1,127.7)  

       
      Total revenues  17,166.2  2,115.9  899.5  231.0  (1,127.7) 19,284.9 
      Depreciation, depletion, and amortization  258.7  181.5  46.0  37.7    523.9 
      Fixed charges  191.7  86.9  28.9  10.5  10.7  328.7 
      Income tax expense (benefit)  250.2  78.0  27.0  (4.2)   351.0 
      Income from discontinued operations  186.9      0.9    187.8 
      Net income (b)  767.0  120.2  37.0  12.2    936.4 
      Segment assets  16,387.3  3,783.2  1,252.8  887.8  (509.5) 21,801.6 
      Capital expenditures  768.0  297.0  63.0  21.0    1,149.0 

      2005

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       
      Unaffiliated revenues $13,763.1 $2,036.5 $961.7 $207.0 $ $16,968.3 
      Intersegment revenues  859.3    11.1    (870.4)  

       
      Total revenues  14,622.4  2,036.5  972.8  207.0  (870.4) 16,968.3 
      Depreciation, depletion and amortization  250.4  185.8  46.6  40.2    523.0 
      Fixed charges  178.0  80.3  26.4  10.0  15.5  310.2 
      Income tax expense (benefit)  41.7  101.2  21.2  (0.2)   163.9 
      Income from discontinued operations  73.8      20.6    94.4 
      Cumulative effects of changes in accounting principles  (7.4)     0.2    (7.2)
      Net income (c)  425.8  149.4  26.7  21.2    623.1 
      Segment assets  16,620.4  3,424.4  1,222.5  476.1  (269.5) 21,473.9 
      Capital expenditures  709.0  241.0  50.0  32.0    1,032.0 
       
       Reportable Segments  
        
        
       
       
       Holding
      Company and
      Other

        
        
       
       
       Generation
       NewEnergy
       Regulated
      Electric

       Regulated
      Gas

       Eliminations
       Consolidated
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      2010

                            

      Unaffiliated revenues

       $1,189.2 $9,692.6 $2,752.1 $704.9 $1.2 $ $14,340.0 

      Intersegment revenues

        1,055.1  428.8  0.2  4.5    (1,488.6)  
        

      Total revenues

        2,244.3  10,121.4  2,752.3  709.4  1.2  (1,488.6) 14,340.0 

      Depreciation, depletion, and amortization

        136.1  83.4  205.2  44.0  48.9    517.6 

      Fixed charges

        142.0  3.0  106.3  24.0  (0.2) 2.7  277.8 

      Income tax (benefit) expense

        (873.1) 106.5  72.6  24.5  3.8    (665.7)

      Net (loss) income (1)

        (1,255.3) 176.2  110.0  37.6  (0.3)   (931.8)

      Net (loss) income attributable to common stock

        (1,255.3) 138.6  99.8  34.6  (0.3)   (982.6)

      Segment assets

        9,789.6  3,836.2  5,287.4  1,379.9  858.0  (1,132.6) 20,018.5 

      Capital expenditures

        327.4  127.2  499.1  103.0      1,056.7 

      2009

                            

      Unaffiliated revenues

       $664.2  11,345.8 $2,820.7 $753.8 $14.3 $ $15,598.8 

      Intersegment revenues

        2,110.0  163.4    4.5  0.1  (2,278.0)  
        

      Total revenues

        2,774.2  11,509.2  2,820.7  758.3  14.4  (2,278.0) 15,598.8 

      Depreciation, depletion, and amortization

        176.8  82.5  218.1  44.0  67.7    589.1 

      Fixed charges

        166.5  39.7  113.3  26.0  2.4  2.2  350.1 

      Income tax expense (benefit)

        3,107.1  (179.1) 50.9  17.1  (9.2)   2,986.8 

      Net income (loss) (2)

        4,766.7  (348.2) 79.1  25.5  (19.7)   4,503.4 

      Net income (loss) attributable to common stock

        4,766.7  (402.3) 68.9  22.5  (12.4)   4,443.4 

      Segment assets

        12,402.1  4,167.5  4,994.6  1,413.4  4,573.7  (4,006.9) 23,544.4 

      Capital expenditures

        1,039.2  116.8  373.0  66.0      1,595.0 

      2008

                            

      Unaffiliated revenues

       $856.2  15,185.4 $2,679.5 $1,004.8 $16.0 $ $19,741.9 

      Intersegment revenues

        2,102.3  666.3  0.2  19.2  0.1  (2,788.1)  
        

      Total revenues

        2,958.5  15,851.7  2,679.7  1,024.0  16.1  (2,788.1) 19,741.9 

      Depreciation, depletion, and amortization

        174.3  118.7  184.2  43.7  62.3    583.2 

      Fixed charges

        140.7  50.6  113.5  26.3  2.3  15.7  349.1 

      Income tax expense (benefit)

        121.3  (226.0) (4.9) 25.5  5.8    (78.3)

      Net (loss) income (3)

        (357.7) (1,011.4) 11.1  40.4  (0.8)   (1,318.4)

      Net (loss) income attributable to common stock

        (357.7) (994.2) 1.1  37.2  (0.8)   (1,314.4)

      Segment assets (4)

        11,205.9  7,063.5  4,583.1  1,392.4  3,431.6  (5,392.4) 22,284.1 

      Capital expenditures

        1,445.2  315.8  388.0  74.0      2,223.0 
      (a)(1)
      Our merchant energyGeneration business recognized the following after-tax items: impairment charges on certain of our equity method investment of $1,487.1 million, loss on the early retirement of 2012 Notes of $30.9 million, amortization of the basis difference in CENG of $117.5 million, impact of the power purchase agreement with CENG of $113.3 million, gain on the sale of Mammoth Lakes geothermal generating facility of $24.7 million, and a gain on the comprehensive agreement with EDF of $121.3 million. Our NewEnergy business recognized earnings relating to an after-tax lossinternational coal supplier contract dispute settlement of $12.2$35.4 million. Our Generation, NewEnergy, regulated electric and holding company and other businesses recognized deferred income tax expense relating to federal subsidies for providing post-employment prescription drug benefits of $0.8 million, related to a cancelled wind development project, an after-tax gain of $39.2$0.1 million, on sales of CEP equity,$3.1 million, and an after-tax charge of $1.4$4.8 million, for workforce reduction costs as describedrespectively. We discuss these items in more detail in Note 2.

      (b)(2)
      Our merchant energyGeneration business recognized anthe following after-tax items: gain of $47.1 million on sale of gas-fired plants and an after-tax gaina 49.99% membership interest in CENG to EDF of $17.9$4,456.1 million, amortization of basis difference in investment in CENG of $17.8 million, loss on the initial public offeringearly extinguishment of CEP as discussedzero coupon senior notes of $10.0 million, merger termination and strategic alternatives costs of $9.7 million, and impairment charges of our nuclear decommissioning trust assets through November 6, 2009 of $46.8 million. Our NewEnergy business recognized the following after-tax items: merger termination and strategic alternatives costs of $4.1 million, losses on divestitures, which include losses on the sales of the international commodities and gas trading operations, the reclassification of losses on previously designated cash-flow hedges from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss because the forecasted transactions are probable of not occurring, earnings that are no longer part of our core business, of $371.9 million, impairment losses and other costs of $84.7 million, and workforce reduction costs of $9.3 million. Our regulated electric and gas businesses recognized after-tax charges of $56.7 million and $10.4 million, respectively, for the accrual of a residential customer credit. Our holding company and other businesses recognized after-tax charges of $11.5 million for impairment losses and other costs. We discuss these items in more detail in Note 2.

      (3)
      Our merchant energyGeneration business recognized the following after-tax charges: workforce reduction costs of $3.7 million, merger termination and strategic alternatives costs of $742.3 million, impairment charges and other costs of $8.3 million, and an impairment charge of our nuclear decommissioning trust assets of $82.0 million. Our NewEnergy business recognized the following after-tax charges: impairment losses and other costs of $460.1 million, workforce reduction costs of $5.8 million, merger termination and strategic alternatives costs of $462.1 million, net emission allowance write-down of $28.7 million, a net gain on the sale of upstream gas properties of $16.0 million, and a gain on sale of a dry bulk vessel of $18.9 million. Our regulated electric business ourrecognized after-tax charges related to workforce reduction costs of $2.8 million and the Maryland settlement credit of $110.5 million. Our regulated gas business and our other nonregulated businesses recognized an after-tax charges of $21.3 million, $0.8 million, $0.4 million, and $0.2 million for merger-related costs andcharge related to workforce reduction costs as describedof $1.0 million. Our holding company and other businesses recognized an after-tax charge related to workforce reduction costs of $0.1 million. We discuss these items in more detail in Note 2.

      (c)(4)
      Our merchant energy business, our regulated electric business, our regulated gas business,At December 31, 2008, Holding Company and our other nonregulatedOther Businesses segment assets include approximately $1.6 billion of intercompany receivables, primarily relating to the allocation of merger termination costs of approximately $1.2 billion to these businesses, recognized after-tax chargesand $1.0 billion of $13.0 million, $3.7 million, $1.3 million,restricted cash related to the issuance of Series B Preferred Stock to EDF. These funds are held at the holding company and $0.2 millionare restricted for merger-related costs and workforce reduction costs as describedpayment of the 14% Senior Notes held by MidAmerican. The 14% Senior Notes were repaid in more detailfull in Note 2.January 2009.


      111


      Table of Contents

      4Investments

      Investments in Joint Ventures, Qualifying Facilities and Power Projects, CEP, and Joint VenturesCEP

      Qualifying FacilitiesInvestments in joint ventures, qualifying facilities, domestic power projects, and Power Projects

      Our merchant energy business holds up to a 50% voting interest in 24 operating domestic energy projects thatCEP consist of electric generation, fuel processing, or fuel handling facilities. Of these 24the following:

      At December 31,
       2010
       2009
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Joint Ventures:

             
       

      CENG

       $2,991.1 $5,222.9 
       

      UNE

          122.0 

      Qualifying facilities and domestic power projects:

             
       

      Coal

        65.0  119.7 
       

      Hydroelectric

        46.3  55.2 
       

      Geothermal

          40.0 
       

      Biomass

        55.1  56.2 
       

      Fuel Processing

        16.7  24.3 
       

      Solar

        6.8  6.9 
        

      Total

       $3,181.0 $5,647.2 
        

              Investments in joint ventures, qualifying facilities, domestic power projects, 17 are "qualifying facilities" that receive certain exemptions and pricingCEP were accounted for under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 based on the facilities' energy source or the use of a cogeneration process.following methods:

      CEP

      At December 31,
       2010
       2009
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Equity method

       $3,174.2 $5,640.3 

      Cost method

        6.8  6.9 
        

      Total

       $3,181.0 $5,647.2 
        

      In November 2006, CEP, a limited liability company formed by        We are actively involved in our merchant energy business, completed an initial public offering. As of December 31, 2006, we owned approximately 54% of CEPCENG nuclear joint venture, qualifying facilities and consolidated CEP. During the second quarter of 2007, CEP issued additional equity to the public and our ownershippower projects. Our percentage fell below 50%. Therefore, we deconsolidated CEP and began accountingvoting interests in these investments accounted for our investment usingunder the equity method under Accounting Principles Board Opinion (APB) No. 18,range from 20% to 50.01%. Equity in earnings of these investments is as follows:

      Year ended December 31,
       2010
       2009
       2008
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      CENG

       $218.8 $33.9 $ 

      Amortization of basis difference in CENG (seeNote 2 for more detail)

        (195.2) (29.6)  
        

      Total equity investment earnings—CENG (1)

        23.6  4.3   

      UNE

        (16.8) (24.7) (5.9)

      Shipping JV

          (1.8) 37.4 

      CEP

          (4.6) 7.7 

      Qualifying facilities and domestic power projects

        18.2  20.7  37.2 
        

      Total equity investment earnings

       $25.0 $(6.1)$76.4 
        
      (1)
      For the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, total equity investment (losses) earnings in CENG include $2.0 million and $0.4 million, respectively, of expense related to the portion of cost of certain share-based awards that we fund on behalf of EDF.

              We describe each of these investments below. Additionally, we recorded impairment charges on certain of our equity method investments. We discuss these impairment charges inThe Equity Method of Accounting for Investments in Common StockNote 2. As of December 31, 2007, we hold a 28.5% voting interest in CEP.

      Joint Ventures

      CENG

      On November 6, 2009, we completed the sale of a 49.99% membership interest in CENG, our nuclear generation and operation business, to EDF. As a result of this transaction, we deconsolidated CENG and began to record our 50.01% investment in CENG under the equity method of accounting. Because the transaction occurred on November 6, 2009, we recorded $4.3 million of equity investment earnings in CENG, which represents our share of earnings from CENG from November 6, 2009 through December 31, 2009, net of the amortization of the basis difference in CENG. The basis difference is the difference between the fair value of our investment in CENG at closing and our share of the underlying equity in CENG, because the underlying assets and liabilities of CENG were retained at their carrying value. SeeNote 2 for a more detailed discussion.


      112


      Table of Contents

              Summarized balance sheet information for CENG is as follows:

      At December 31,
       2010
       2009
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Current assets

       $507.4 $513.0 

      Noncurrent assets

        4,583.0  4,404.2 

      Current liabilities

        630.9  556.9 

      Noncurrent liabilities

        1,338.7  1,716.1 

              Summarized income statement information for CENG is as follows:

       
       For the Year Ended
      December 31, 2010

       For the Period from
      November 6, 2009 through
      December 31, 2009

       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Revenues

       $1,575.3 $217.6 

      Expenses

        1,174.5  153.0 

      Income from operations

        400.8  64.6 

      Net income

        441.6  68.5 

      In December 2006,future periods, we formedmay be eligible for distributions from CENG in excess of our 50.01% ownership interest based on tax sharing provisions contained in the operating agreement for CENG. We would record these distributions, if realized, in earnings in the period received.

      Comprehensive Agreement with EDF

      On October 26, 2010, we reached a shipping joint venture in whichcomprehensive agreement with EDF that restructured the relationship between our merchant energy business has atwo companies, eliminated the outstanding asset put arrangement, and transferred to EDF the full ownership of UNE. This comprehensive agreement was approved by the boards of directors of both Constellation Energy and EDF, and the transaction closed on November 3, 2010. The agreement includes the following significant terms:

        EDF acquired our 50% ownership interest. The joint venture will owninterest in UNE. Upon completion of this transaction, EDF became the sole owner of UNE, and operate six freight ships. In 2007, we madeno longer have responsibility for developing or financing new nuclear plants through UNE.
        We terminated our rights under the existing asset put arrangement and, as a result, did not sell any of our plants to EDF.
        EDF paid us $140 million in cash contributionsand transferred to us 2.4 million of approximately $57the shares of Constellation Energy common stock that it owned (with a fair value of $72.4 million at the time of the noncash financing transfer).
        EDF relinquished its seat on our Board of Directors, and the existing investor agreement between the companies (which includes a "standstill" provision) was terminated.

              Later in November 2010, EDF transferred to us 0.1 million shares of Constellation Energy common stock, with a fair value of $2.8 million, in a noncash financing, upon our registering EDF's remaining shares of Constellation Energy common stock with the Securities and Exchange Commission. This enables EDF to transfer its remaining shares without restriction. We recorded a total pre-tax gain of $202.0 million in the fourth quarter of 2010 related to the joint venture.above aspects of our comprehensive agreement with EDF.

              In addition, upon receipt of necessary approvals:

        CENG will transfer to UNE potential new nuclear sites at the Nine Mile Point and Ginna nuclear generating plants in New York State.
        EDF will transfer to us an additional 1.0 million of the shares of Constellation Energy common stock that it owns.

              We and EDF will remain owners in CENG under the same ownership percentages—Constellation Energy holding a 50.01% interest and EDF holding a 49.99% interest. Further:

        The power purchase agreement between CENG and each of Constellation Energy and EDF was modified such that prospective purchases will be unit contingent through the end of its term in 2014. In addition, beginning on January 1, 2015 and continuing to the end of the life of the respective plants, we will purchase 50.01% of the output of CENG's nuclear plants and EDF will purchase 49.99% of that output.
        The administrative services agreement, which specifies payment to us for providing administrative support services to CENG, was extended through 2017.

              We discuss the PPA and ASA in more detail inNote 16.

      UNE

      In August 2007, we formed a joint venture, UniStar Nuclear Energy, LLC (UNE)UNE, with an affiliate of Electricite de France, SA (EDF). We have a 50% ownership interest in this joint ventureEDF to develop, own, and operate new nuclear projects in the United States and Canada. The agreement withOn November 3, 2010, we sold our 50% ownership interest in UNE to EDF. As a result of this transaction, EDF includes a phased-in investmentis the sole owner of $625 million by EDF in UNE. In 2007, EDF invested $350 million in UNE, and we contributed thewill no longer have responsibility for developing or financing new nuclear line of businesses we have developed over the past two years, which included assets with a book value of $48.7 millionplants through UNE.

      Qualifying Facilities and the right to develop possible new nuclear projects at our existing nuclear plant locations. Upon reaching certain licensing milestones, EDF will contributePower Projects

      Our Generation business holds up to a 50% voting interest in 15 operating domestic energy projects that consist of electric generation, fuel processing, or fuel handling facilities. Of these 15 projects, 13 are "qualifying facilities" that receive certain exemptions and pricing under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 based on the facilities' energy source or the use of a cogeneration process.

      CEP

      In November 2006, CEP, a limited liability company formed by our NewEnergy business, completed an additional $275 million in UNE.

      initial public offering. As of December 31, 2006, we owned approximately 54% of CEP and consolidated CEP. During the second quarter of 2007, UNE's capitalized construction work in progress was approximately $135 million. InCEP issued additional equity to the event thatpublic and our portion of any losses incurred by UNE exceedownership percentage fell below 50%. Therefore, we deconsolidated CEP and began accounting for our investment we will continue to record those losses in earnings unless it is determined that UNE will cease operations and is subsequently dissolved.

              Investments in qualifying facilities, domestic power projects, joint ventures and CEP consist of the following:

      At December 31,
       2007
       2006

       
       (In millions)
      Qualifying facilities and domestic power projects:      
       
      Coal

       

      $

      119.6

       

      $

      125.7
       Hydroelectric  54.7  55.1
       Geothermal  37.6  40.5
       Biomass  43.6  46.6
       Fuel Processing  26.8  33.7
       Solar  7.0  7.0
      CEP  143.0  
      Joint Ventures:      
       Shipping JV  56.6  
       UNE  52.2  
      Other  1.1  

      Total $542.2 $308.6

              Investments in qualifying facilities, domestic power projects, CEP and joint ventures were accounted for under the following methods:

      At December 31,
       2007
       2006

       
       (In millions)
      Equity method $535.2 $301.6
      Cost method  7.0  7.0

      Total $542.2 $308.6

              Our percentage voting interests in these investments accounted for underusing the equity method range from 16% to 50%. Equity in earnings


      113


      Table of these investments was $8.3 million in 2007, $13.8 million in 2006, and $3.6 million in 2005.

      Investments Classified as Available-for-SaleContents

      We classify the following investments as available-for-sale:

        nuclear decommissioning trust funds,
        marketable equity securities, and
        trust assets securing certain executive benefits.

              This means we do not expect to hold them to maturity, and we do not consider them trading securities.


              We show the fair values, gross unrealized gains and losses, and book value basis for allmethod. As of our available-for-sale securities in the following tables. We use specific identification to determine cost in computing realized gains and losses.

      At December 31, 2007
       Book
      Value

       Unrealized Gains
       Unrealized Losses
       Fair
      Value


       
       (In millions)
      Marketable equity securities $819.9 $266.3 $(0.2)$1,086.0
      Corporate debt and U.S. treasuries  224.5  5.4    229.9
      State municipal bonds  48.3  2.5    50.8

      Totals $1,092.7 $274.2 $(0.2)$1,366.7


      At December 31, 2006

       

      Book
      Value


       

      Unrealized Gains


       

      Unrealized Losses


       

      Fair
      Value


       
       (In millions)
      Marketable equity securities $811.0 $221.1 $(3.3)$1,028.8
      Corporate debt and U.S. treasuries  160.1  1.9  (0.3) 161.7
      State municipal bonds  68.1  5.4  (0.2) 73.3

      Totals $1,039.2 $228.4 $(3.8)$1,263.8

              In addition to the above securities, the nuclear decommissioning trust funds included $11.7 million at December 31, 2007 and $24.1 million at December 31, 2006 of cash and cash equivalents.2010, we hold a 28.5% voting interest in CEP.

              The preceding tables include $256.7 million in 2007 of net unrealized gains and $206.1 million in 2006 of net unrealized gains associated with the nuclear decommissioning trust funds that are reflected as a change in the nuclear decommissioning trust funds in our Consolidated Balance Sheets.

              Our available-for-sale investments in our nuclear decommissioning trust funds are managed by third parties who have independent discretion over the purchases and sales of securities. Effective January 1, 2007, we recognize impairments for any of these investments for which the fair value declines below our book value. In 2007, we recognized $8.5 million pre-tax of impairment losses on our nuclear decommissioning trust investments.

              Prior to 2007, we had unrealized losses relating to certain available-for-sale investments in our nuclear decommissioning trust funds that we considered to be temporary in nature and, therefore, we did not recognize an impairment for any security with an unrealized loss. We show the fair values and unrealized losses of our investments that were in a loss position at December 31, 2006 and were not impaired in the table below.

      At December 31, 2006

       
       
       Less than 12 months
       12 months
      or more

       Total
       
       
       
       
      Description of
      Securities

       Fair
      Value

       Unrealized
      Losses

       Fair
      Value

       Unrealized
      Losses

       Fair
      Value

       Unrealized
      Losses

       

       
       
       (In millions)
       
      Marketable equity securities $9.5 $(0.8)$12.4 $(1.7)$21.9 $(2.5)
      Corporate debt and U.S. treasuries  10.3    23.7  (0.3) 34.0  (0.3)
      State municipal bonds  4.8    14.0  (0.2) 18.8  (0.2)

       
      Total temporarily impaired securities $24.6 $(0.8)$50.1 $(2.2)$74.7 $(3.0)

       

              Gross and net realized gains and losses on available-for-sale securities were as follows:

      Year ended December 31,
       2007
       2006
       2005
       

       
       
       (In millions)
       
      Gross realized gains $33.5 $13.3 $12.3 
      Gross realized losses  (30.9) (13.0) (9.3)

       
      Net realized gains $2.6 $0.3 $3.0 

       

              Gross realized losses for 2007 include an $8.5 million pre-tax other than temporary impairment (as explained above) for investments whose fair value declined below their book value.

              The corporate debt securities, U.S. Government agency obligations, and state municipal bonds mature on the following schedule:

      At December 31, 2007
        

       
       (In millions)
      Less than 1 year $10.9
      1-5 years  97.4
      5-10 years  74.5
      More than 10 years  97.9

      Total maturities of debt securities $280.7


      Investments in Variable Interest Entities

      As of December 31, 2010, we consolidated three VIEs in which we were the primary beneficiary, and we had significant interests in six VIEs for which we did not have controlling financial interests and, accordingly, were not the primary beneficiary.

      RSB BondCo LLCConsolidated Variable Interest Entities

      In 2007, BGE formed RSB BondCo LLC (BondCo), a special purpose bankruptcy-remotebankruptcy- remote limited liability company.company, to acquire and hold rate stabilization property and to issue and service bonds secured by the rate stabilization property. In June 2007, BondCo purchased rate stabilization property from BGE, including the right to assess, collect, and receive non-bypassable rate stabilization charges payable by all residential electric customers of BGE. These charges are being assessed in order to recover previously incurred power purchase costs that BGE deferred pursuant to Senate Bill 1.

              BGE has determined that BondCo is a variable interest entityVIE for which it is also the primary beneficiary. As a result, BGE, and we, consolidated BondCo.

              The BondCo assets are restricted and can only be used to settle the obligations of BondCo. Further, BGE is required to remit all payments it receives from customers for rate stabilization charges to BondCo. During 2010, 2009, and 2008, BGE remitted $90.3 million, $85.8 million, and $87.2 million, respectively, to BondCo.

              BGE did not provide any additional financial support to BondCo during 2010 or 2009. Further, BGE does not have any contractual commitments or obligations to provide additional financial support to BondCo unless additional rate stabilization bonds are issued. The BondCo creditors do not have any recourse to the general credit of BGE in the event the rate stabilization charges are not sufficient to cover the bond principal and interest payments of BondCo.

              During 2009, our NewEnergy business formed two new entities and combined them with its existing retail gas activities into a retail gas entity group for the purpose of entering into a collateralized gas supply agreement with a third party gas supplier. While we own 100% of these entities, we determined that the retail gas entity group is a VIE because there is not sufficient equity to fund the group's activities without the additional credit support we provide in the form of a letter of credit and a parental guarantee. We discussare the primary beneficiary of the retail gas entity group; accordingly, we consolidate the retail gas entity group as a VIE, including the existing retail gas customer supply operation, which we formerly consolidated as a voting interest entity.

              The gas supply arrangement is collateralized as follows:

        The assets of the retail gas entity group must be used to settle obligations under the third party gas supply agreement before it can make any distributions to us,
        The third party gas supplier has a collateral interest in all of the assets and equity of the retail gas entity group, and
        As of December 31, 2010, we provided a $100 million parental guarantee and a $52 million letter of credit to the third party gas supplier in support of the retail gas entity group.

              Other than credit support provided by the parental guarantee and the letter of credit, we do not have any contractual or other obligations to provide additional financial support to the retail gas entity group. The retail gas entity group creditors do not have any recourse to our general credit. Finally, we did not provide any financial support to the retail gas entity group during 2010, other than the equity contributions, parental guarantee and the letter of credit.

              We also consolidate a retail power supply VIE for which we became the primary beneficiary in 2008 as a result of a modification to its contractual arrangements that changed the allocation of the economic risks and rewards of the VIE among the variable interest holders. The consolidation method of accountingthis VIE did not have a material impact on our financial results or financial condition.

              The carrying amounts and classification of the above consolidated VIEs' assets and liabilities included in more detailour consolidated financial statements at December 31, 2010 and 2009 are as follows:

       
       2010
       2009
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Current assets

       $516.6 $608.9 

      Noncurrent assets

        57.7  67.7 
        

      Total Assets

       $574.3 $676.6 
        

      Current liabilities

       $345.5 $509.9 

      Noncurrent liabilities

        399.0  420.3 
        

      Total Liabilities

       $744.5 $930.2 
        

              All of the assets in the table above are restricted for settlement of the VIE obligations and all of the liabilities in the preceding table can only be settled using VIE resources.

              During 2010, as part of the 2009 order from the Maryland PSC approving our transaction with EDF, we created RF HoldCo LLC, a bankruptcy-remote special purpose subsidiary to hold all of the common equity interests in BGE. This subsidiary is not a VIE. However, due to our ownership of 100% of the voting interests of RF HoldCo LLC, we consolidate this subsidiary as a voting interest entity.

              BGE and RF HoldCo are separate legal entities and are not liable for the debts of Constellation Energy. Accordingly, creditors of Constellation Energy may not satisfy their debts from the assets of BGE and RF HoldCo except as required by applicable law or regulation. Similarly, Constellation Energy is not liable for the debts of BGE or RF HoldCo. Accordingly, creditors of BGE and RF HoldCo may not satisfy their debts from the assets of Constellation Energy except as required by applicable law or regulation.


      114


      Note 1.Table of Contents

      Unconsolidated Variable Interest Entities

      WeAs of December 31, 2010 and 2009, we had significant interests in six VIEs for which we were not the primary beneficiary. Other than the obligations listed in the table below, we have a significant interestnot provided any material financial or other support to these entities during 2010 or 2009.

              The nature of these entities and our involvement with them are described in the following variable interest entities (VIE) for which we are not the primary beneficiary:table:

      VIE Category
       Nature of
      InvolvementEntity
      Financing

       Nature of
      Constellation
      Energy
      Involvement

      Obligations or
      Requirement
      to Provide
      Financial
      Support

      Initial
      Date of
      Involvement


      Power projects and fuel supply entitiesEquity investment and guaranteesPrior to 2003

      Power contract monetization entities (2 entities)


       

      Combination of debt and equity financing
      Power sale agreements, loans, and guarantees
       

      $24.9 million and $34.7 million in letters of credit at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively
      March 2005

      Oil & gas fields

      Power projects and fuel supply entities (4 entities)


       

      Combination of debt and equity financing

      Equity investmentinvestments and guarantees


       

      May 2006

      Retail power supply

      $5.0 million and $2.0 million debt guarantee and working capital funding at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively


       

      Power sale agreement


      September 2006

      Prior to 2003

              For purposes of aggregating the various VIEs for disclosure, we evaluated the risk and reward characteristics for, and the significance of, each VIE. We discuss in greater detail the nature of our involvement with the power contract monetization VIEs in theCustomerPower Contract RestructuringMonetization VIEs section below.

              We concluded that power over the most economically significant activities of two of the power project VIEs is shared equally among the equity holders. Accordingly, neither of the equity holders consolidates these VIEs. The equity holders own 50% interests in these VIEs and all of the significant decisions require the mutual consent of the equity holders.

              The following is summary information available as of December 31, 20072010 about the VIEs in which we have a significant interest, but are not the primary beneficiary:these entities:

       
       Power
      Contract
      Monetization
      VIEs

       All
      Other
      VIEs

       Total

       
       (In millions)

      Total assets $736.6 $358.1 $1,094.7
      Total liabilities  583.2  195.6  778.8
      Our ownership interest    46.1  46.1
      Other ownership interests  153.4  116.4  269.8
      Our maximum exposure to loss  56.5  158.0  214.5

       
       Power
      Contract
      Monetization
      VIEs

       All
      Other
      VIEs

       Total
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Total assets

       $492.9 $288.3 $781.2 

      Total liabilities

        382.6  113.2  495.8 

      Our ownership interest

          48.7  48.7 

      Other ownership interests

        110.3  126.4  236.7 

      Our maximum exposure to loss

        24.9  46.4  71.3 

      Carrying amount and location of variable interest on balance sheet:

                
        

      —Other investments

          41.4  41.4 

              The following is summary information available as of December 31, 2009 about these entities:

       
       Power
      Contract
      Monetization
      VIEs

       All
      Other
      VIEs

       Total
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Total assets

       $568.3 $338.6 $906.9 

      Total liabilities

        460.4  77.9  538.3 

      Our ownership interest

          62.6  62.6 

      Other ownership interests

        107.9  198.1  306.0 

      Our maximum exposure to loss

        34.7  64.6  99.3 

      Carrying amount and location of variable interest on balance sheet:

                
        

      ���Other investments

          62.6  62.6 

              Our maximum exposure to loss representsis the loss that we would incur in the unlikely event that our interests in all of these entities were to become worthless and we were required to fund the full amount of all guarantees associated with these entities. Our maximum exposure to loss as of December 31, 20072010 and 2009 consists of the following:

        outstanding receivables, loans, and letters of credit totaling $166.4zero and $34.7 million, respectively,
        the carrying amount of our investment totaling $46.1$41.4 million and $62.6 million, respectively, and
        debt and performancepayment guarantees totaling $29.9 million and $2.0 million.million, respectively.

              We assess the risk of a loss equal to our maximum exposure to be remote.remote and, accordingly have not recognized a liability associated with any portion of the maximum exposure to loss. In addition, there are no agreements with, or commitments by, third parties that would affect the fair value or risk of our variable interests in these variable interest entities.

      CustomerPower Contract RestructuringMonetization VIEs

      In March 2005, our merchant energyNewEnergy business closed a transaction in which we assumed from a counterparty two power sales contracts with previously existing VIEs. Under the contracts, we sell power to the VIEs which, in turn, sell that power to an electric distribution utility through 2013.

      The VIEs previously were created by the counterparty to issue debt in order to monetize the value of the original contracts to purchase and sell power. The difference betweenUnder the contract prices at which the VIEs purchase and sell power is used to service the debt of the VIEs, which totaled $558 million at December 31, 2007.

              The market price for power at the closing of our transaction was higher than the contract price under the existing power sales contracts, we assumed. Therefore, we received compensation totaling $308.5 million, equalsell power to the net present valueVIEs which, in turn, sell that power to an electric distribution utility through 2013. In connection with this transaction, a third party acquired the equity of the difference between the contract price under the power sales contracts and the market price of power at closing. We used a portion of this amount to settle $68.5 million of existing derivative liabilities with the same counterparty,VIEs and we also loaned $82.8 million to the holder of the equity in the VIEs. As a result, we received net cash at closing of $157.2 million. We also guaranteed our subsidiaries' performance under the power sales contracts.

              The table below summarizes the transaction and the net cash received at closing:


       
       
       (In millions)
       
      Gross compensation from original power sales contracts counterparty equal to fair value of power sales contracts at closing $308.5 

      Settlement of existing derivative liabilities

       

       

      (68.5

      )

      Third-party loan secured by equity in VIE

       

       

      (82.8

      )

       
      Net cash received at closing $157.2 

       

              We recorded the closing of this transaction in our financial statements as follows:


      Balance Sheet
      Cash Flows

      Fair value of power sales contracts assumed (designated as cash-flow hedge)Derivative liabilitiesFinancing cash inflow

      Settlement of existing derivative liabilities


      Derivative liabilities


      Operating cash outflow

      Third-party loan


      Other assets


      Investing cash outflow

              We recorded the gross compensation we received to assume the power sales contracts as a financing cash inflow because it constitutes a prepayment forthat party a portion of the market price of power, which we will sell to the VIEs over the term of the contracts and does not represent a cash inflow from current period operating activities. We record the ongoing cash flows related to the sale of power to the VIEs as a financing cash inflow in accordance with SFAS No. 149,Amendment of FASB Statement No. 133 on Derivative and Hedging Activities.

      purchase price. If the electric distribution utility were to default under its obligation to buy power from the VIEs, the equity holder could transfer its equity interests to us in lieu of repaying the loan. In this event, we would have the right to seek recovery of our losses from the electric distribution utility.


      115


      Table of Contents

      5Intangible Assets

      Goodwill

      Goodwill is the excess of the cost of an acquisition over the fair value of the net assets acquired. OurAs of December 31, 2010 and 2009, our goodwill balance iswas primarily related to our merchantretail energy reporting unit within our NewEnergy business acquisitions. The changes in the carrying amount of goodwill for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 are as follows:

      2007
       Balance at
      January 1,

       Goodwill
      Acquired

       Other(a)
       Balance at
      December 31,


       
       (In millions)
      Goodwill $157.6 $103.4 $0.3 $261.3


      2006

       

      Balance at
      January 1,


       

      Goodwill
      Acquired


       

      Other(a)


       

      Balance at
      December 31,


       
       (In millions)

      Goodwill $147.1 $11.1 $(0.6)$157.6

              (a) Other represents purchase price adjustments.

      segment. Goodwill is not amortized; rather, it is evaluated for impairment at least annually.

              The changes in the gross amount of goodwill and the accumulated impairment losses for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 are as follows:

      At December 31,
       2010
       2009
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Balance as of January 1,

             
       

      Gross goodwill

       $292.0 $271.1 
       

      Accumulated impairment losses

        (266.5) (266.5)
        

      Net goodwill

        25.5  4.6 

      Goodwill acquired (1)

        51.5  18.6 

      Impairment losses

           

      Other purchase price adjustments

          2.3 
        

      Balance as of December 31,

             
       

      Gross goodwill

        343.5  292.0 
       

      Accumulated impairment losses

        (266.5) (266.5)
        

      Net goodwill

       $77.0 $25.5 
        
      (1)
      We evaluated ourdiscuss the goodwill acquired in 2007 and 2006 and determined that it was not impaired.2010 in more detail in Note 15.

              For tax purposes, $227.6$169.4 million of our gross goodwill balance at December 31, 2010 is deductible.

      Intangible Assets Subject to Amortization

      Intangible assets with finite lives are subject to amortization over their estimated useful lives. The primary assets included in this category are as follows:

      At December 31,
       2007
       2006

       
       Gross
      Carrying
      Amount

       Accumul-
      ated
      Amortiz-
      ation

       Net
      Asset

       Gross
      Carrying
      Amount

       Accumul-
      ated
      Amortiz-
      ation

       Net
      Asset


       
       (In millions)
      Software $494.0 $(232.3)$261.7 $392.3 $(182.6)$209.7
      Permits and licenses  62.3  (8.0) 54.3  60.4  (5.9) 54.5
      Operating manuals and procedures  38.6  (8.4) 30.2  38.5  (7.1) 31.4
      Other  26.8  (19.9) 6.9  26.3  (17.2) 9.1

      Total $621.7 $(268.6)$353.1 $517.5 $(212.8)$304.7

       
       2010
        
        
        
       
      At December 31,
        
        
       2009
       
        
       
       Gross
      Carrying
      Amount

       Accumul-
      ated
      Amortiz-
      ation

       Net
      Asset

       Gross
      Carrying
      Amount

       Accumul-
      ated
      Amortiz-
      ation

       Net
      Asset

       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Software

       $596.8 $(397.1)$199.7 $580.5 $(347.3)$233.2 

      Permits and licenses

        2.7  (1.0) 1.7  2.2  (0.8) 1.4 

      Other

        22.3  (8.2) 14.1  29.0  (13.9) 15.1 
        

      Total

       $621.8 $(406.3)$215.5 $611.7 $(362.0)$249.7 
        

      BGE had intangible assets with a gross carrying amount of $194.1$250.2 million and accumulated amortization of $124.4$171.4 million at December 31, 20072010 and $191.3$242.5 million and accumulated amortization of $109.2$148.8 million at December 31, 20062009 that are included in the table above. Substantially all of BGE's intangible assets relate to software.

              We recognized amortization expense related to our intangible assets as follows:

      Year Ended December 31,
       2007
       2006
       2005

       
       (In millions)
      Nonregulated businesses $51.9 $37.2 $30.6
      BGE  20.2  18.6  26.3

      Total Constellation Energy $72.1 $55.8 $56.9


      Year Ended December 31,
       2010
       2009
       2008
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Nonregulated businesses

       $64.8 $74.2 $66.8 

      BGE

        25.8  23.6  20.1 
        

      Total Constellation Energy

       $90.6 $97.8 $86.9 
        

              The following is our, and BGE's, estimated amortization expense related to our intangible assets for 20082011 through 20122015 for the intangible assets included in our, and BGE's, Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2007:2010:

      Year Ended December 31,
       2008
       2009
       2010
       2011
       2012

       
       (In millions)
      Estimated amortization expense—Nonregulated businesses $61.4 $60.2 $53.9 $48.3 $37.2
      Estimated amortization expense—BGE  18.3  15.0  13.1  10.9  6.1

      Total estimated amortization expense—Constellation Energy $79.7 $75.2 $67.0 $59.2 $43.3

      Year Ended December 31,
       2011
       2012
       2013
       2014
       2015
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Estimated amortization expense—Nonregulated businesses

       $58.5 $37.4 $19.5 $8.8 $3.9 

      Estimated amortization expense—BGE

        23.7  17.2  13.2  8.6  6.7 
        

      Total estimated amortization expense—Constellation Energy

       $82.2 $54.6 $32.7 $17.4 $10.6 
        

      Unamortized Energy Contracts

      As discussed inNote 1, unamortized energy contract assets and liabilities represent the remaining unamortized balance of nonderivative energy contracts acquired, certain contracts which no longer qualify as derivatives due to the absence of a liquid market, or derivatives designated as normal purchases and normal sales, which we previously recorded as derivative assets and liabilities. Unamortized energy contract assets also include the power purchase agreement entered into with CENG with an initial fair value of approximately $0.8 billion. See

              During 2007, we acquired several pre-existing power-related contracts that had been originated by other parties in prior periods when market prices were lower than current levels. The net proceeds received inNote 16 for more details on this transaction were primarily recorded as a net liability in "Unamortized energy contracts."power purchase agreement.

              We present separately in our Consolidated Balance Sheets the net unamortized energy contract assets and liabilities for these contracts. The table below presents the gross and net carrying amount and accumulated amortization of the net liability that we have recorded in our Consolidated Balance Sheets:

      At December 31
       2007
       2006
       

       
       
       Carrying
      Amount

       Accumul-
      ated
      Amortiz-
      ation

       Net
      Liability

       Carrying
      Amount

       Accumul-
      ated
      Amortiz-
      ation

       Net
      Liability

       

       
       
       (In millions)
       
      Unamortized energy contracts, net $(2,290.0)$889.5 $(1,400.5)$(1,642.0)$464.5 $(1,177.5)

       

       
       2010
        
        
        
       
      At December 31
        
        
       2009
       
        
       
       Carrying
      Amount

       Accumul-
      ated
      Amortiz-
      ation

       Net
      Asset

       Carrying
      Amount

       Accumul-
      ated
      Amortiz-
      ation

       Net
      Liability

       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Unamortized energy contracts, net

       $(1,360.9)$1,473.8 $112.9 $(1,587.1)$1,584.5 $(2.6)
        

              We recognized amortization expense of $106.8 million, $353.1 million, and $390.4 million related to these energy contract assets for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008 for our nonregulated businesses.

              The table below presents the estimated net favorable impact on our operating results for the amortization for these assets and liabilities over the next five-years:

      Year Ended December 31,
       2008
       2009
       2010
       2011
       2012

       
       (In millions)
      Estimated amortization $358.9 $308.8 $289.4 $84.4 $79.3

      Year Ended December 31,
       2011
       2012
       2013
       2014
       2015
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Estimated amortization

       $414.1 $(49.2)$(71.8)$(71.3)$(68.8)
        


      116


      Table of Contents

      6Regulatory Assets (net)

      As discussed inNote 1, the Maryland PSC and the FERC provide the final determination of the rates we charge our customers for our regulated businesses. Generally, we use the same accounting policies and practices used by nonregulated companies for financial reporting under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. However, sometimes the Maryland PSC or FERC orders an accounting treatment different from that used by nonregulated companies to determine the rates we charge our customers. When this happens, we must defer certain regulated expenses and income in our Consolidated Balance Sheets as regulatory assets and liabilities. We then record them in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss) (using amortization) when we include them in the rates we charge our customers.

              We summarize regulatory assets and liabilities in the following table, and we discuss each of them separately below.

      At December 31,
       2007
       2006
       

       
       
       (In millions)
       
      Deferred fuel costs       
       Rate stabilization deferral $593.4 $326.9 
       Other  19.4  37.8 
      Electric generation-related regulatory asset  135.9  154.8 
      Net cost of removal  (182.3) (161.3)
      Income taxes recoverable through future rates (net)  63.9  67.1 
      Deferred postretirement and postemployment benefit costs  16.1  19.3 
      Deferred environmental costs  8.9  10.0 
      Workforce reduction costs  2.4  4.9 
      Other (net)  (6.6) (8.0)

       
      Total regulatory assets (net)  651.1  451.5 
      Less: Current portion of regulatory assets       
         (net)  74.9  62.5 

       
      Long-term portion of regulatory assets       
         (net) $576.2 $389.0 

       

      At December 31,
       2010
       2009
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Deferred fuel costs

             
       

      Rate stabilization deferral

       $415.6 $477.5 
       

      Other

        8.8  14.3 

      Electric generation-related regulatory asset

        86.9  102.5 

      Net cost of removal

        (210.5) (210.1)

      Income taxes recoverable through future rates (net)

        68.3  67.6 

      Deferred Smart Energy Savers ProgramSM costs

        64.3  10.8 

      Deferred Advanced Meter Infrastructure costs

        12.2  11.3 

      Deferred postretirement and postemployment benefit costs

        8.4  9.6 

      Deferred environmental costs

        5.6  6.5 

      Workforce reduction costs

        1.3  1.5 

      Other (net)

        (8.1) (4.6)
        

      Total regulatory assets (net)

        452.8  486.9 

      Less: Current portion of regulatory assets (net)

        78.7  72.5 
        

      Long-term portion of regulatory assets (net)

       $374.1 $414.4 
        

      Deferred Fuel Costs

      Rate Stabilization Deferral

      In June 2006, Senate Bill 1 was enacted in Maryland and imposed a rate stabilization measure that capped rate increases by BGE for residential electric customers at 15% from July 1, 2006 to May 31, 2007. As a result, BGE recorded a regulatory asset on its Consolidated Balance Sheets equal to the difference between the costs to purchase power and the revenues collected from customers, as well as related carrying charges based on short-term interest rates from July 1, 2006 to May 31, 2007. In addition, as required by Senate Bill 1, the Maryland PSC approved a plan that allowed residential electric customers the option to further defer the transition to market rates from June 1, 2007 to January 1, 2008. Customers participating in the deferral from June 1, 2007 to December 31, 2007 will repay the deferred charges without interest. During 2007, and 2006, BGE deferred $306.4 million and $326.9 million, respectively, of electricity purchased for resale expenses and certain applicable carrying charges if applicable, as a regulatory asset related to the rate stabilization plans. During 2007,2010 and 2009, BGE recovered $39.2$61.8 million and $51.4 million, respectively, of electricity purchased for resale expenses and carrying charges related to the rate stabilization plan regulatory asset. BGE began amortizing the regulatory asset associated with the deferral which ended in May 2007 to earnings over a period not to exceed ten years when collection from customers began in June 2007. Customers who participated in the deferral from June 1, 2007 to December 31, 2007 repaid the deferred charges without interest over a 21-month period which began in April 2008 and ended in December 2009.

      Other

      As described inNote 1, deferred fuel costs are the difference between our actual costs of purchased energy and our fuel rate revenues collected from customers. We reduce deferred fuel costs as we collect them from our customers and increase deferred fuel costs when we refund them to our customers.

              We exclude other deferred fuel costs from rate base because their existence is relatively short-lived. These costs are recovered in the following year through our fuel rates.

      Electric Generation-Related Regulatory Asset

      As a result of the deregulation of electric generation, BGE ceased to meet the requirements for the application of SFAS No. 71accounting for a regulated business for the previous electric generation portion of its business. In accordance with SFAS No. 101,Regulated Enterprises—Accounting for the Discontinuation of Application of FASB Statement No. 71, and EITF 97-4,Deregulation of the Pricing of Electricity—Issues Related to the Application of FASB Statements No. 71 and 101,As a result, BGE wrote-off all of its entire individual, generation-related regulatory assets and liabilities. BGE established a single, generation-related regulatory asset to be collected through its regulated transmission and distribution business,rates, which is being amortized on a basis that approximates the pre-existing individual regulatory asset amortization schedules.

              A portion of this regulatory asset represents income taxes recoverable through future rates that do not earn a regulated rate of return. These amounts were $81.1$53.3 million as of December 31, 20072010 and $89.4$62.8 million as of December 31, 2006.2009. We will continue to amortize this amount through 2017.

              Another portion of this regulatory asset represents the decommissioning and decontamination fund payment for federal uranium enrichment facilities that do not earn a regulated rate of return on the rate base investment. These amounts were $2.3 million at December 31, 2007 and $5.5 million at December 31, 2006. Prior to the deregulation of electric generation, these costs were recovered through the electric fuel rate mechanism, and were excluded from rate base. We will continue to amortize this amount through 2008.

      Net Cost of Removal

      As discussed inNote 1, we use the group depreciation method for the regulated business. This method is currently an acceptable method of accounting under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and ishas been widely used in the energy, transportation, and telecommunication industries.

              Historically, under the group depreciation method, the anticipated costs of removing assets upon retirement were provided for over the life of those assets as a component of depreciation expense. However, effective January 1, 2003, we adopted SFAS No. 143,Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations. In addition to providing the accounting requirements for recognizing an estimated liability for legal obligations associated with the retirement of tangible long-lived assets, SFAS No. 143 precludes the recognition of expected net future costs of removal is shown as a component of depreciation expense or accumulated depreciation.

              BGE is required by the Maryland PSC to use the group depreciation method, including cost of removal, under regulatory accounting. For ratemaking purposes, net cost of removal is a


      117


      Table of Contents

      component of depreciation expense and the related accumulated depreciation balance is included as a net reduction to BGE's rate base investment. For financial reporting purposes, BGE continues to accrue for the future cost of removal for its regulated gas and electric assets by increasing itsa regulatory liability. This liability is relieved when actual removal costs are incurred.

      Income Taxes Recoverable Through Future Rates (net)

      As described inNote 1, income taxes recoverable through future rates are the portion of our net deferred income tax liability that is applicable to our regulated business, but has not been reflected in the rates we charge our customers. These income taxes represent the tax effect of temporary differences in depreciation and the allowance for equity funds used during construction, offset by differences in deferred tax rates and deferred taxes on deferred investment tax credits. We amortize these amounts as the temporary differences reverse.


      Deferred Smart Energy Savers ProgramSM Costs

      Deferred Smart Energy Savers ProgramSM costs are the costs incurred to implement demand response and conservation programs. These programs are designed to help BGE manage peak demand, improve system reliability, reduce customer consumption, and improve service to customers by giving customers greater control over their energy use. Actual costs incurred in the demand response program, which began in January 2008, are being recovered over a 5-year amortization period from the date incurred pursuant to an order by the Maryland PSC. Actual costs incurred in the conservation program, which began in February 2009, are being amortized as incurred pursuant to an order by the Maryland PSC.

      Deferred Advanced Meter Infrastructure Costs

      Between 2007 and 2009, the Maryland PSC approved and BGE conducted a series of successful smart grid pilot programs for a total cost of $11.3 million, which, pursuant to a Maryland PSC order, was deferred in a regulatory asset, without earning a regulatory rate of return. In August 2010, the Maryland PSC approved a comprehensive smart grid initiative for BGE which included the planned installation of 2 million residential and commercial electric and gas smart meters. As part of the Maryland PSC's August 2010 order, BGE has been authorized to establish a separate regulatory asset for incremental costs incurred to implement the initiative, net depreciation and amortization associated with the meters, plus an appropriate return on these costs. Additionally, the Maryland PSC order requires that BGE prove the cost effectiveness of the entire smart grid initiative prior to seeking recovery of the costs deferred in these regulatory assets. Therefore, the commencement and timing of the amortization of these deferred costs is currently unknown.

      Deferred Postretirement and Postemployment Benefit Costs

      DeferredWe record a regulatory asset for the deferred postretirement and postemployment benefit costs are the costs we recorded under SFAS No. 106,Employers' Accounting for Postretirement Benefits Other Than Pensions, and SFAS No. 112,Employers' Accounting for Postemployment Benefits, in excess of the costs we included in the rates we chargecharged our customers.customers through 1997. We began amortizing these costs over a 15-year period in 1998.

      Deferred Environmental Costs

      Deferred environmental costs are the estimated costs of investigating and cleaning up contaminated sites we own. We discuss this further inNote 12. We amortized $21.6 million of these costs (the amount we had incurred through October 1995) and are amortizing $6.4 million of these costs (the amount we incurred from November 1995 through June 2000) over 10-year periods in accordance with the Maryland PSC's orders. We applied for and received rate relief for an additional $5.4 million of clean-up costs incurred during the period from July 2000 through November 2005. These costs are being amortized over a 10-year period that began in January 2006.

      Workforce Reduction Costs

      The portionsportion of the costs associated with our Voluntary Special Early Retirement Program and2008 workforce reduction programsprogram that relate to BGE's gas business arewere deferred in 2009 as a regulatory assetsasset in accordance with the Maryland PSC's orders in prior rate cases. As a result of a 2005 gas base rate case, the remaining regulatory assets associated with workforce reductions totaling $7.3 million as of December 31, 2005cases and are being amortized over a 3-year5-year period that began in January 2006. These remaining regulatory assets were previously amortized over 5-year periods beginning in January and February 2002.2009.

      Other (Net)

      Other regulatory assets are comprised of a variety of current assets and liabilities that do not earn a regulatory rate of return due to their short-term nature.


      118


      Table of Contents

      7Pension, Postretirement, Other Postemployment, and Employee Savings Plan Benefits

      We offer pension, postretirement, other postemployment, and employee savings plan benefits. BGE employees participate in the benefit plans that we offer. We describe each of our plans separately below. Nine Mile Point, owned by CENG, offers its own pension, postretirement, other postemployment, and employee savings plan benefits to its employees. The benefits forIn connection with the deconsolidation of CENG as a result of the investment in CENG by EDF on November 6, 2009, the Nine Mile Point areplan is no longer included in our consolidated results. In addition, benefit plan assets and obligations relating to CENG employees that previously participated in our plans were transferred into new CENG plans that are no longer included in our consolidated results. Therefore, the tables beginning below.below include the benefits for the CENG plans, including Nine Mile Point, through November 6, 2009.

              We use a December 31 measurement date for our pension, postretirement, other postemployment, and employee savings plans. The following table summarizes our defined benefit liabilities and their classification in our Consolidated Balance Sheets:

      At December 31,
       2007
       2006

       
       (In millions)
      Pension benefits $385.7 $468.6
      Postretirement benefits  421.5  441.5
      Postemployment benefits  66.3  57.0

      Total defined benefit obligations  873.5  967.1
      Less: Amount recorded in other current liabilities  44.9  38.8

      Total noncurrent defined benefit obligations $828.6 $928.3

      At December 31,
       2010
       2009
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Pension benefits

       $218.0 $411.7 

      Postretirement benefits

        334.9  322.3 

      Postemployment benefits

        55.0  50.6 
        

      Total defined benefit obligations

        607.9  784.6 

      Less: Amount recorded in other current liabilities

        33.2  40.7 
        

      Total noncurrent defined benefit obligations

       $574.7 $743.9 
        

      Pension Benefits

      We sponsor several defined benefit pension plans for our employees. These include basic qualified plans that most employees participate in and several non-qualified plans that are available only to certain employees. A defined benefit plan specifies the amount of benefits a plan participant is to receive using information about the participant. Employees do not contribute to these plans. Generally, we calculate the benefits under these plans based on age, years of service, and pay.

              Sometimes we amend the plans retroactively. These retroactive plan amendments require us to recalculate benefits related to participants' past service. We amortize the change in the benefit costs from these plan amendments on a straight-line basis over the average remaining service period of active employees.

              We fund the qualified plans by contributing at least the minimum amount required under IRS regulations. We calculate the amount of funding using an actuarial method called the projected unit credit cost method. The assets in all of the plans at December 31, 2007 and 2006 were mostly marketable equity and fixed income securities.


      Postretirement Benefits

      We sponsor defined benefit postretirement health care and life insurance plans that cover the majority of our employees. Generally, we calculate the benefits under these plans based on age, years of service, and pension benefit levels or final base pay. We do not fund these plans. For nearly all of the health care plans, retirees make contributions to cover a portion of the plan costs. For the life insurance plan, retirees do not make contributions to cover a portion of the plan costs.

              Effective in 2002, we amended our postretirement medical plans for all subsidiaries other than Nine Mile Point. Our contributions for retiree medical coverage for future retirees who were under the age of 55 on January 1, 2002 are capped at the 2002 level. We also amended our plans to increase the Medicare eligible retirees' share of medical costs.

              In 2003, the President signed into law the Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (the Act). This legislation provides a prescription drug benefit for Medicare beneficiaries, a benefit that we provide to our Medicare eligible retirees. Our actuaries concluded that prescription drug benefits available under our postretirement medical plan are "actuarially equivalent" to Medicare Part D and thus qualify for the subsidy under the Act. This subsidy reduced our 20072010 Accumulated Postretirement Benefit Obligation by $40.8$30.9 million and our 20072010 postretirement medical payments by $2.7$2.2 million.

      Liability Adjustments

      Our pension accumulated benefit obligation has exceeded the fair value of our plan assets since 2001. At December 31, 20072010 and 2006,2009, our pension obligations were greater thanand the fair value of our plan assets for our qualified and our nonqualified pension plans were as follows:

       
       Qualified Plans
        
        
      At December 31, 2007
       Nine Mile
       Other
       Non-Qualified
      Plans

       Total

       
       (In millions)
      Accumulated benefit obligation $98.0 $1,332.2 $69.7 $1,499.9
      Fair value of assets  78.6  1,179.9    1,258.5

      Unfunded obligation $19.4 $152.3 $69.7 $241.4

       
       Qualified Plans
        
        
       
       Non-Qualified
      Plans

        
      At December 31, 2006
       Nine Mile
       Other
       Total

       
       (In millions)
      Accumulated benefit obligation $107.5 $1,306.0 $63.8 $1,477.3
      Fair value of assets  54.6  1,106.6    1,161.2

      Unfunded obligation $52.9 $199.4 $63.8 $316.1

              We were required to remeasure the additional minimum pension liability prior to calculating the impact of adopting SFAS No. 158,Employer's Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans, an amendment of FASB Statement No. 87, 106 and 132(R), on December 31, 2006. We recorded additional minimum pension liability adjustments through December 31, 2006 as follows:

       
       Increase (Decrease)

       
       
       

       
       
        
        
       Accumulated Other
      Comprehensive Loss

       
       
       Pension
      Liability
      Adjustment

        
       
       
       Intangible
      Asset *

       
       
       Pre-tax
       After-tax
       

       
       
       (In millions)
       
      Cumulative through 2004 $359.6 $40.6 $(319.0)$(192.8)
      2005  121.4  (6.1) (127.5) (77.1)
      2006  (131.1) (5.9) 125.2  75.6 

       
      Total $349.9 $28.6 $(321.3)$(194.3)

       

      *  Included in "Other assets" in our Consolidated Balance Sheets.

      At December 31, 2010
       Qualified
      Plan

       Non-Qualified
      Plans

       Total
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Accumulated benefit obligation

       $1,405.2 $87.8 $1,493.0 

      Fair value of assets

        1,408.1    1,408.1 
        

      Net (asset) unfunded obligation

       $(2.9)$87.8 $84.9 
        

       Under SFAS No. 158, we

      At December 31, 2009
       Qualified
      Plan

       Non-Qualified
      Plans

       Total
       
        

      Accumulated benefit obligation

       $1,277.5 $84.1 $1,361.6 

      Fair value of assets

        1,058.1    1,058.1 
        

      Net unfunded obligation

       $219.4 $84.1 $303.5 
        

              We are required to reflect the funded status of our pension plans in terms of the projected benefit obligation, which is higher than the accumulated benefit obligation because it includes the impact of expected future compensation increases on the pension obligation. In addition, SFAS No. 158 requires us toWe reflect the funded status of our


      119


      Table of Contents


      postretirement benefits in terms of the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation.

              Upon adoption of SFAS No. 158, we reversed the intangible asset associated with the minimum pension liability adjustment above, increased our pension and postretirement liabilities, and reduced equity. The following table summarizes the impactimpacts of SFAS No. 158funded status adjustments recorded at December 31, 2007during 2010 and 2006:2009:

       
       Increase (Decrease)
       
       
        
        
        
       Accumulated Other
      Comprehensive
      (Income) Loss

       
       
        
       Postretirement
      Benefit
      Liability

        
       
       
       Pension
      Liability

       Intangible
      Asset

       
       
       Pre-tax
       After-tax
       

       
       
       (In millions)
       
      December 31, 2007 (1) $3.1 $(22.5)$ $19.4 $11.6 

       
      December 31, 2006 $152.5 $99.7 $(28.6)$(280.8)$(169.5)

       

       
        
        
       Accumulated Other
      Comprehensive
      Income (Loss)
       
       
        
       Postretirement
      Benefit
      Liability

       
       
       Pension
      Liability

       
       
       Pre-tax
       After-tax
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      December 31, 2010

       $73.7 $10.9 $(84.6)$(54.6)
        

      December 31, 2009

       $(49.3)$1.0 $48.3 $25.4 
        

      November 6, 2009 (1)

       $(211.7)$(20.9)$232.6 $138.0 
        
      (1)
      Amounts primarily reflect net impactWe performed a remeasurement of 2007 actuarial gainsour pension and losses.postretirement obligations at November 6, 2009 in connection with the separation of a portion of those plans upon the deconsolidation of CENG.

      Obligations and Assets

      As a result of workforce reduction initiatives in the generation business, pension and postretirement special termination benefits were recorded in 2007 and 2006. We discuss the workforce reduction initiatives further inNote 2.


      We show the change in the benefit obligations and plan assets of the pension and postretirement benefit plans in the following tables. Postretirement benefit plan amounts are presented net of expected reimbursements under Medicare Part D.

       
       Pension
      Benefits

       Postretirement
      Benefits

       
       
       2007
       2006
       2007
       2006
       

       
       
       (In millions)
       
      Change in benefit obligation (1)             
      Benefit obligation at January 1 $1,629.8 $1,678.6 $441.5 $460.4 
      Service cost  49.4  49.0  6.5  7.7 
      Interest cost  94.7  89.3  24.4  23.7 
      Plan participants' contributions      8.7  8.3 
      Actuarial (gain) loss  (27.6) (49.1) (22.3) (27.1)
      Special termination benefits  1.2  4.2  0.3  3.5 
      Benefits paid (2) (3)  (103.3) (142.2) (37.6) (35.0)

       
      Benefit obligation at December 31 $1,644.2 $1,629.8 $421.5 $441.5 

       

       
       Pension
      Benefits
       Postretirement
      Benefits
       
       
       2010
       2009
       2010
       2009
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Change in benefit obligation (1)

                   

      Benefit obligation at January 1

       $1,469.8 $1,804.3 $322.3 $415.4 

      Service cost

        37.9  50.8  2.4  6.3 

      Interest cost

        84.7  101.1  17.7  22.6 

      Plan amendments

          2.4  (3.3)  

      Plan participants' contributions

            10.5  10.2 

      Actuarial loss (gain)

        124.0  55.8  14.2  1.0 

      Separation of CENG plans

        (3.0) (410.5)   (98.6)

      Settlements

        (5.2) (19.0)    

      Special termination benefits

        0.6  0.1  0.1   

      Benefits paid (2)(3)

        (82.7) (115.2) (29.0) (34.6)
        

      Benefit obligation at December 31

       $1,626.1 $1,469.8 $334.9 $322.3 
        
      (1)
      Amounts reflect projected benefit obligation for pension benefits and accumulated postretirement benefit obligation for postretirement benefits.

      (2)
      Pension benefits paid include annuity payments and lump-sum distributions, and transfers to nonqualified deferred compensation plans.distributions.

      (3)
      Postretirement benefits paid are net of Medicare Part D reimbursements.

       
       Pension
      Benefits

       Postretirement
      Benefits

       
       
       2007
       2006
       2007
       2006
       

       
       
       (In millions)
       
      Change in plan assets             
      Fair value of plan assets at January 1 $1,161.2 $1,107.1 $ $ 
      Actual return on plan assets  71.3  141.1     
      Employer contribution(1)  129.3  55.2  28.9  26.7 
      Plan participants' contributions      8.7  8.3 
      Benefits paid(2) (3)  (103.3) (142.2) (37.6) (35.0)

       
      Fair value of plan assets at December 31 $1,258.5 $1,161.2 $ $ 

       

       
       Pension
      Benefits
       Postretirement
      Benefits
       
       
       2010
       2009
       2010
       2009
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Change in plan assets

                   

      Fair value of plan assets at January 1

       $1,058.1 $867.6 $ $ 

      Actual return on plan assets

        148.8  217.6     

      Employer contribution (1)

        289.1  341.5  18.5  24.4 

      Plan participants' contributions

            10.5  10.2 

      Separation of CENG Plan

          (234.4)    

      Settlements

        (5.2) (19.0)    

      Benefits paid (2)(3)

        (82.7) (115.2) (29.0) (34.6)
        

      Fair value of plan assets at December 31

       $1,408.1 $1,058.1 $ $ 
        
      (1)
      Includes benefit payments for unfunded plans.

      (2)
      Pension benefits paid include annuity payments and lump-sum distributions, and transfers to nonqualified deferred compensation plans.distributions.

      (3)
      Postretirement benefits paid are net of Medicare Part D reimbursements.

      Net Periodic Benefit Cost and Amounts Recognized in Other Comprehensive Income

      We show the components of net periodic pension benefit cost in the following table:

      Year Ended December 31,

       2007
       2006
       2005
       

       
       
       (In millions)
       
      Components of net periodic pension benefit cost          
      Service cost $49.4 $49.0 $44.8 
      Interest cost  94.7  89.3  83.9 
      Expected return on plan assets  (102.6) (96.6) (100.2)
      Amortization of unrecognized prior service cost  5.2  5.7  5.7 
      Recognized net actuarial loss  32.7  37.3  25.1 
      Amount capitalized as construction cost  (11.7) (13.4) (7.4)

       
      Net periodic pension benefit cost (1) $67.7 $71.3 $51.9 

       

      Year Ended December 31,
       2010
       2009
       2008
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Components of net periodic pension benefit cost

                

      Service cost

       $37.9 $50.8 $55.4 

      Interest cost

        84.7  101.1  100.2 

      Expected return on plan assets

        (101.8) (118.9) (111.3)

      Amortization of unrecognized prior service cost

        3.9  10.9  10.9 

      Recognized net actuarial loss

        34.4  38.3  24.7 

      Amount capitalized as construction cost

        (10.2) (10.2) (10.2)
        

      Net periodic pension benefit cost (1)

       $48.9 $72.0 $69.7 
        
      (1)
      Net periodic pension benefit cost excludes SFAS No. 88 termination benefitssettlement charges of $1.2 million in 2007, SFAS No. 88 settlement charge of $12.7$1.5 million and termination benefits of $4.2$0.6 million in 2006, and SFAS No. 882010, settlement charge of $4.4$9.0 million and termination benefits of $0.1 million in 2005.2009, and termination benefits of $2.2 million in 2008. BGE's portion of our net periodic pension benefit costs, excluding amount capitalized, was $21.8$30.9 million in 2007, $25.02010, $27.9 million in 2006,2009, and $15.0$25.5 million in 2005.2008. The vast majority of our retirees arewere BGE employees.


      120


      Table of Contents

              We show the components of net periodic postretirement benefit cost in the following table:

      Year Ended December 31,
       2007
       2006
       2005
       

       
       
       (In millions)
       
      Components of net periodic postretirement benefit cost          
      Service cost $6.5 $7.7 $7.6 
      Interest cost  24.4  23.7  23.8 
      Amortization of transition obligation  2.1  2.1  2.1 
      Recognized net actuarial loss  4.1  6.6  6.4 
      Amortization of unrecognized prior service cost  (3.5) (3.5) (3.5)
      Amount capitalized as construction cost  (7.7) (8.2) (7.7)

       
      Net periodic postretirement benefit cost (1) $25.9 $28.4 $28.7 

       

      Year Ended December 31,
       2010
       2009
       2008
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Components of net periodic postretirement benefit cost

                

      Service cost

       $2.4 $6.3 $6.1 

      Interest cost

        17.7  22.6  24.0 

      Amortization of transition obligation

        2.1  2.1  2.1 

      Recognized net actuarial loss

        0.4  2.2  2.0 

      Amortization of unrecognized prior service cost

        (2.6) (3.4) (3.5)

      Amount capitalized as construction cost

        (5.4) (6.3) (7.6)
        

      Net periodic postretirement benefit cost (1)

       $14.6 $23.5 $23.1 
        
      (1)
      Net periodic postretirement benefit cost excludes SFAS No. 106 termination benefits of $0.3$0.1 million in 20072010 and $3.5$0.8 million in 2006.2008. BGE's portion of our net periodic postretirement benefit cost, excluding amounts capitalized, was $15.5$17.2 million in 2007, $16.62010, $18.7 million in 2006,2009, and $17.4$20.4 million in 2005.2008.

              As        In determining net periodic pension benefit cost, we apply our expected return on plan assets to a resultmarket-related value of adopting SFAS No. 158, theplan assets that recognizes asset gains and losses ratably over a five-year period.

              The following is a summary of amounts we have recorded in "Accumulated other comprehensive income"loss" and of expected amortization of those amounts over the next twelve months:

       
        
        
        
        
       Expected
      Amortiz-
      ation
      Next
      12 Months

       
       Pension
      Benefits

       Postretirement
      Benefits

       
       2007
       2006
       2007
       2006

       
       (In millions)
      Unrecognized actuarial loss $445.9 $475.7 $90.2 $116.6 $30.6
      Unrecognized prior service cost  21.4  26.7  (26.2) (29.7) 1.4
      Unrecognized transition obligation      10.7  12.8  2.1

      Total $467.3 $502.4 $74.7 $99.7 $34.1

       
       Pension
      Benefits
       Postretirement
      Benefits
        
       
       
       Expected
      Amortiz-
      ation Next
      12 Months

       
       
       2010
       2009
       2010
       2009
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Unrecognized actuarial loss

       $741.4 $702.2 $65.3 $51.5 $49.5 

      Unrecognized prior service cost

        6.1  9.9  (14.0) (13.9) 1.1 

      Unrecognized transition obligation

            3.5  6.2  1.8 
        

      Total

       $747.5 $712.1 $54.8 $43.8 $52.4 
        

      Expected Cash Benefit Payments

      The pension and postretirement benefits we expect to pay in each of the next five calendar years and in the aggregate for the subsequent five years are shown below.in the following table. These estimated benefits are based on the same assumptions used to measure the benefit obligation at December 31, 2007,2010, but include benefits attributable to estimated future employee service.

       
        
       Postretirement Benefits
       
       Pension
      Benefits*

       Before
      Medicare
      Part D

       Subsidy
       After
      Medicare
      Part D


       
       (In millions)
      2008 $107.2 $31.2 $(2.4)$28.8
      2009  102.3  32.3  (2.6) 29.7
      2010  115.9  33.0  (2.8) 30.2
      2011  108.4  33.6  (2.9) 30.7
      2012  121.8  33.9  (3.1) 30.8
      2013-2017  763.4  178.6  (16.2) 162.4

       
       Pension
      Benefits

       Postretirement
      Benefits (1)

       
        

      2011

       $105.5 $23.0 

      2012

        100.5  23.3 

      2013

        108.1  23.8 

      2014

        111.3  24.4 

      2015

        147.9  24.8 

      2016-2020

        669.3  127.4 
        
      (1)
      Postretirement benefit payments are net of Medicare Part D reimbursements.

      * Excludes transfers to nonqualified deferred compensation plans

      Assumptions

      We made the assumptions below to calculate our pension and postretirement benefit obligations and periodic cost.

       
       Pension
      Benefits

       Postretirement
      Benefits

       Assumption
      Impacts
      Calculation of

       
       2007
       2006
       2007
       2006

      Discount rate 6.25%6.00%6.25%6.00%Benefit Obligation and Periodic Cost
      Expected return on plan assets 8.75 8.75 N/A N/A Periodic Cost
      Rate of compensation increase 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Benefit Obligation and Periodic Cost

       
       Pension
      Benefits
       Postretirement
      Benefits
        
       
       Assumption
      Impacts
      Calculation of

       
       2010
       2009
       2010
       2009
       

      Discount rate

        5.50% 6.00% 5.50% 6.00%Benefit Obligation and Periodic Cost

      Expected return on plan assets

        8.50  8.50  N/A  N/A Periodic Cost

      Rate of compensation increase

        4.0  4.0  4.0  4.0 Benefit Obligation and Periodic Cost

              Our discount rate is based on a bond portfolio analysis of high quality corporate bonds whose maturities match our expected benefit payments. Our 8.75%8.50% overall expected long-term rate of return on plan assets reflectsreflected our long-term investment strategy in terms of asset mix targets and expected returns for each asset class at the beginning of 2010. Effective in 2011, we reduced our expected long-term rate of return assumption to 8.00% reflecting our updated investment strategy, asset mix, and expected return for each asset class.

              Annual health care inflation rate assumptions also impact the calculation of our postretirement benefit obligation and periodic cost. We assumed the following health care inflation rates to produce average claims by year as shown below:

      At December 31,
       2007
       2006

      Next year 9.0% 8.5%
      Following year 8.0% 8.0%
      Ultimate trend rate 5.0% 5.0%
      Year ultimate trend rate reached 2014 2014

      At December 31,
       2010
       2009
       
        

      Next year

        8.5% 8.0%

      Following year

        7.5% 7.5%

      Ultimate trend rate

        5.0% 5.0%

      Year ultimate trend rate reached

        2017  2016 

              A one-percentone-percentage point increase in the health care inflation rate from the assumed rates would increase the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation by approximately $29$21.6 million as of December 31, 20072010 and would increase the combined service and interest costs of the postretirement benefit cost by approximately $2$1.2 million annually.

              A one-percentone-percentage point decrease in the health care inflation rate from the assumed rates would decrease the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation by approximately $25$18.8 million


      121


      Table of Contents

      as of December 31, 20072010 and would decrease the combined service and interest costs of the postretirement benefit cost by approximately $2$1.1 million annually.

      Qualified Pension Plan Assets

      The asset allocations forInvestment Strategy

      We invest our qualified pension plan assets using the following investment objectives:

        ensure availability of funds for payment of plan benefits as they become due,
        provide for a reasonable amount of long-term growth of capital (both principal and income) without excessive volatility,
        produce investment results that meet or exceed the assumed long-term rate of return,
        improve the funded status of the plan over time, and
        reduce future contribution and expense volatility as funded status improves.

              To achieve these objectives, Constellation Energy, through a management Investment Committee (the Committee), has adopted an investment strategy that divides its pension investment program into two primary portfolios:

        return seeking assets—those assets intended to generate returns in excess of pension liability growth, and
        liability hedging assets—those assets intended to have characteristics similar to pension liabilities.

              Currently, the Committee allocates 60% of its plan assets to return seeking assets to help reduce existing deficits in the funded status of the plan. As the funded status of our plans wereimprove, the Committee expects to reduce its exposure to return seeking assets and increase its liability hedging assets to reduce its total risk.

      Return Seeking Assets

      The purpose of return seeking assets is to provide investment returns in excess of the growth of pension liabilities. This category includes a diversified portfolio of public equities, private equity, real estate, hedge funds, high yield bonds and other instruments. These assets are likely to have lower correlations with the pension liabilities and lead to higher funded status risk over shorter periods of time.

      Liability Hedging Assets

      The purpose of liability hedging assets, such as follows:long duration bonds and interest rate derivatives, is to hedge against interest rate changes. Exposure to liability hedging assets is intended to reduce the volatility of plan funded status, contributions, and pension expense.

      At December 31,
       2007
       2006
       

       
      Equity securities 62%64%
      Debt securities 31 28 
      Other 7 8 

       
      Total 100% 100% 

       

      Risk Management

      The Committee manages plan asset risk using several approaches. First, the assets are invested in two diverse portfolios, each of which contains investments across a spectrum of asset classes. Second, the Committee considers the long-term investment horizon of the plan, which is greater than ten years. The long-term horizon enables the Committee to tolerate the risk of investment losses in the short-term with the expectation of higher returns in the long-term. Third, the Committee employs a thorough due diligence program prior to selecting an investment, and a rigorous ongoing monitoring program once assets are invested. The Committee evaluates risk on an ongoing basis.

      Asset Allocation

      Plan assets are diversified across various asset classes and securities based on the investment strategy approved by the Committee. This policy allocation is long-term oriented and consistent with the risk tolerance and funded status. The target asset allocation as well as the actual allocations for 2010 and 2009 are provided below.

       
       Target
      Allocation
       Actual
      Allocation
       
      At December 31,
       2010
       2009
       2010
       2009
       
        

      Global equity securities

        42% 48% 42% 57%

      Fixed income securities

        40  30  37  27 

      Alternative investments

        12  15  8  7 

      High yield bonds

        6  7  6  7 

      Cash and cash equivalents

            7  2 

      Derivative instruments

               
        

      Total

        100% 100% 100% 100%
        

              The category "Other" primarily representstarget asset allocation also allows for investments in financial limited partnerships. Our long-term pension plan investment strategy isinstruments, including asset-backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations, which are exposed to seekinterest rate and market risk as well as overall market volatility. These instruments are sensitive to changes in economic conditions. Such changes could materially affect the amounts reported.

              The actual portfolio was rebalanced in December 2010 in accordance with policy target allocations and an asset mix of 58% equity, 30% fixed income, and 12% other investments. Weimprovement in funded status. The Committee will also rebalance our portfolio periodically when the sumactual allocations fall outside of equity and other investments differs from 70% by three percentage pointsthe ranges prescribed in the investment policy or more, we change an outside investment advisor, or we make contributions toas the trust.funded status improves.

      Fair Value Hierarchy

      We determine expected return onthe fair value of the plan assets using unadjusted quoted prices in active markets (Level 1) or pricing inputs that are observable (Level 2) whenever that information is available. We use unobservable inputs (Level 3) to estimate fair value only when relevant observable inputs are not available. We classify assets within this fair value hierarchy based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement of each individual asset taken as a market-relatedwhole.


      122


      Table of Contents

              The following tables set forth by level, within the fair value hierarchy, the investments in the Plans' master trust at fair value as of December 31, 2010 and 2009:

      At December 31, 2010
       Level 1
       Level 2
       Level 3
       Total
      Fair
      Value

       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Global equity securities:

                   
       

      Marketable equity securities

       $143.6 $ $ $143.6 
       

      Common collective trusts

          447.5    447.5 

      Fixed income securities:

                   
       

      Corporate debt securities

          327.9    327.9 

      Government / agency securities

          113.0    113.0 

      Municipal bonds

          54.8    54.8 

      Guarantee insurance contracts

          21.6    21.6 

      High yield bonds

          86.9    86.9 

      Cash equivalents

        93.6      93.6 

      Derivative instruments

          0.9    0.9 

      Alternative investments

            118.3  118.3 
        

      Total

       $237.2 $1,052.6 $118.3 $1,408.1 
        


      At December 31, 2009
       Level 1
       Level 2
       Level 3
       Total
      Fair
      Value

       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Global equity securities

       $215.4 $383.0 $ $598.4 

      Fixed income securities

          289.2    289.2 

      High yield bonds

        0.6  75.6    76.2 

      Cash equivalents

        19.9      19.9 

      Alternative investments

            74.4  74.4 
        

      Total

       $235.9 $747.8 $74.4 $1,058.1 
        

              The following is a description of the valuation methodologies used for assets measured at fair value:

        Global equity securities, which include marketable equity securities and common collective trust securities, are valued at unadjusted quoted market share prices within active markets (Level 1) or based on external price/spread data of comparable securities (Level 2). Common collective trust funds within this category are valued at fair value based on the unit value of planthe fund which is observable on a less frequent basis (Level 2). Unit values are determined by the bank or financial institution sponsoring such funds by dividing the fund's net assets at fair value by its units outstanding at the valuation dates.
        Fixed income (primarily corporate debt securities, government and agency securities, municipal bonds, and guarantee insurance contracts), high yield bonds, and over-the-counter derivatives are valued based on external price data of comparable securities (Level 2).
        Cash equivalents consist of money market funds, which are valued by multiplying unadjusted quoted prices in active markets by the quantity of the assets (Level 1).
        Alternative investments primarily consist of hedge funds, real estate funds, and financial limited partnerships (private equity funds). These investments do not have readily determinable fair values because they are not listed on national exchanges or over-the-counter markets. We have valued these alternative investments at their respective net asset value per share (or its equivalent such as partner's capital) which has been calculated by each partnership's general partner in a manner consistent with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America for investment companies. Among other requirements, the partnerships must value their underlying investments at fair value. While the net asset value per share provides a reasonable approximation of fair value, the fair values of the alternative investments are estimates and, accordingly, such estimated values may differ from the values that recognizes asset gainswould have been used had a ready market for the investments existed, and losses ratably over a five-year period.the differences could be material.

              The following table summarizes the changes in the fair value of the Level 3 assets for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009:


       
       Year Ended
      December 31,
       
       
       2010
       2009
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Balance at beginning of period

       $74.4 $96.3 

      Actual return on plan assets:

             
       

      Assets still held at year end

        (32.1) (2.5)
       

      Assets sold during the year

        37.0  6.4 

      Purchases, sales, and settlements

        22.2  (10.8)

      Transfers into Level 3

        16.8    

      Transfers out of Level 3

            
        

      Net transfers into and out of Level 3

        16.8  (15.0)
        

      Balance at end of year

       $118.3 $74.4 
        

      Contributions and Benefit Payments

      We contributed $125$279.7 million to our qualified pension plans in March 2007, even though there2010. $243.0 million of this contribution was no IRS required minimum contribution in 2007. We expectan acceleration of estimated calendar year 2011 and 2012 contributions. Therefore, we do not plan to contribute $76 millionmake contributions to our qualified pension plans in 2008.2011 and 2012. Our non-qualified pension plans and our postretirement benefit programs are not funded. We estimate that we will incur approximately $8$7 million in pension benefits for our non-qualified pension plans and approximately $29$23 million for retiree health and life insurance costs net of Medicare Part D during 2008.2011.


      123


      Table of Contents

      Other Postemployment Benefits

      We provide the following postemployment benefits:

        health and life insurance benefits to eligible employees determined to be disabled under our Disability Insurance Plan,
        income replacement payments for Nine Mile Point union-represented employees determined to be disabled, and
        income replacement payments for other employees determined to be disabled before November 1995 (payments for employees determined to be disabled after that date are paid by an insurance company, and the cost is paid by employees).

              We recognized expense associated with our other postemployment benefits of $16.7$9.9 million in 2007, $9.62010, $5.3 million in 2006,2009, and $9.2$1.9 million in 2005.2008. BGE's portion of expense associated with other postemployment benefits was $10.2$7.6 million in 2007, $5.62010, $4.4 million in 2006,2009, and $5.4$2.2 million in 2005.2008.

              We assumed the discount rate for other postemployment benefits to be 5.25%4.00% in 20072010 and 5.50%4.75% in 2006.2009. This assumption impacts the calculation of our other postemployment benefit obligation and periodic cost.

      Employee Savings Plan Benefits

      We sponsored two defined contribution plans until November 6, 2009, when upon the close of the sale of a 49.99% interest in CENG to EDF, we deconsolidated CENG and the defined contribution plan related to Nine Mile Point was removed from our books. For all remaining eligible employees of Constellation Energy, we continue to sponsor a defined contribution savings plans that are offered to all eligible employees.plan. The savings plans areplan is a qualified 401(k) plansplan under the Internal Revenue Code. In a defined contribution plan, the benefits a participant is to receive result from regular contributions to a participant account. Matching contributions to participant accounts are made under these plans. Matching contributions to these plans were as follows:

      Year Ended December 31,
       2007
       2006
       2005

       
       (In millions)
      Nonregulated businesses $16.1 $14.6 $13.5
      BGE  5.8  5.4  5.1

      Total Constellation Energy $21.9 $20.0 $18.6

      Year Ended December 31,
       2010
       2009
       2008
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Nonregulated businesses

       $9.9 $14.8 $17.6 

      BGE

        6.3  5.7  5.8 
        

      Total Constellation Energy

       $16.2 $20.5 $23.4 
        


      124


      Table of Contents

      8Credit Facilities and Short-Term Borrowings

      Our short-term borrowings may include bank loans, commercial paper, and bank lines of credit. Short-term borrowings mature within one year from the date of issuance. We pay commitment fees to banks for providing us lines of credit. When we borrow under the lines of credit, we pay market interest rates.

      Constellation Energy

      Constellation Energy had a committed bank line of credit under a five-year credit facility, expiring in July 2012, of $3.85 billion and a one year $250.0 million credit facility at December 31, 2007 for short-term financial needs.

      We enter into these facilities to ensure adequate liquidity to support our operations. Currently, we

      Constellation Energy

      Our liquidity requirements are funded with credit facilities and cash. We fund our short-term working capital needs with existing cash and with our credit facilities, which support direct cash borrowings and the issuance of commercial paper, if available. We also use theour credit facilities to issuesupport the issuance of letters of credit, primarily for our merchant energyNewEnergy business. Additionally, we can borrow directly from the banks or use the facilities to allow the issuance of commercial paper.

              These facilities can issue lettersConstellation Energy had bank lines of credit up to approximately $4.1 billion. Letters ofunder committed credit issued under this facility totaled $1.8facilities totaling $4.2 billion at December 31, 2007.2010 for short-term financial needs as follows:

      Type of Credit
      Facility

       Amount
      (In billions)

       Expiration Date
       Capacity Type
       

      Syndicated Revolver

       $2.50 October 2013 Letters of credit and cash

      Commodity-linked

        0.50 August 2014 Letter of credit and cash

      Bilateral

        0.55 September 2014 Letters of credit

      Bilateral

        0.25 December 2014 Letters of credit and cash

      Bilateral

        0.25 June 2014 Letters of credit and cash

      Bilateral

        0.15 September 2013 Letters of credit
             

      Total

       $4.20    
             

              At December 31, 2006,2010, we had approximately $1.6 billion in letters of credit issued, including $0.4 billion in letters of credit issued under previousthe commodities-linked credit facilities that were replaced withfacility discussed below, and no commercial paper outstanding under these facilities.

              The commodity-linked credit facility currently allows for the five-year facility in 2007 totaled $1.6 billion. The increase inissuance of letters of credit issuedand, as modified in 2010, for cash borrowings, up to a maximum capacity of $0.5 billion. This commodity-linked facility is primarily duedesigned to changes inhelp manage our contingent collateral requirements associated with counterpartiesthe hedging of our NewEnergy business because its capacity increases up to the maximum capacity as natural gas price levels decrease compared to a result of commodityreference price changes.that is adjusted periodically.

              In addition,At December 31, 2010, Constellation Energy had $14.0$32.4 million of short-term borrowingsnotes outstanding at December 31, 2007 underwith a three year $50 million line of credit expiring in 2010 relating to our merchant energy business. The weighted-average effective interest rate for this outstanding borrowing was 7.44% at December 31, 2007. There were no short-term borrowings outstanding under this line of credit at December 31, 2006.

              In January 2008, we entered into a new six month line of credit totaling $500.0 million. This line of credit expires in July 2008 and has an option to be extended for an additional six months, subject to the lender's approval.6.56%.

      BGE

      BGE had no commercial paper outstanding at December 31, 2007 or 2006.

      BGE has a $400.0$600.0 million five-year revolving credit facility expiring in 2011. As of December 31, 2007, BGE had $0.7 million of letters of credit issued under this facility.2011. BGE can borrow directly from the banks, use the facility to allow commercial paper to be issued, if available, or issue letters of credit. At December 31, 2010, BGE had no commercial paper outstanding. There were immaterial letters of credit outstanding at December 31, 2010.

      Net Available Liquidity

      The following table provides a summary of our net available liquidity at December 31, 2010:

      At December 31, 2010
       Constellation
      Energy
      (excluding BGE)

       BGE
       
        
       
       (In billions)
       

      Credit facilities (1)

       $3.7 $0.6 

      Less: Letters of credit issued (1)

        (1.2)  

      Less: Cash drawn on credit facilities

           
        

      Undrawn facilities

        2.5  0.6 

      Less: Commercial paper outstanding

           
        

      Net available facilities

        2.5  0.6 

      Add: Cash and cash equivalents (2)

      �� 2.0   

      Less: Reserved cash (3)

        (1.2)  
        

      Net available liquidity

       $3.3 $0.6 
        
      (1)
      Excludes $0.5 billion commodity-linked credit facility due to its contingent nature and $0.4 billion in letters of credit posted against it.

      (2)
      BGE's cash balance at December 31, 2010 was $50.0 million.

      (3)
      Represents management's expectation at December 31, 2010 of payments for the January 2011 acquisition of the Boston Generating plants ($1.0 billion) and the January 2011 retirement of the 2012 Notes ($0.2 billion).

      Credit Facility Compliance and Covenants

      The credit facilities of Constellation Energy and BGE contain a material adverse change representation but draws on the facilities are not conditioned upon Constellation Energy and BGE making this representation at the time of the draw. However, to the extent a material adverse change has occurred and prevents Constellation Energy or BGE from making other representations that are required at the time of the draw, the draw would be prohibited.

              Certain credit facilities of Constellation Energy contain a provision requiring Constellation Energy to maintain a ratio of debt to capitalization equal to or less than 65%. At December 31, 2010, the debt to capitalization ratio as defined in the credit agreements was 36%.

              The credit agreement of BGE contains a provision requiring BGE to maintain a ratio of debt to capitalization equal to or less than 65%. At December 31, 2010, the debt to capitalization ratio for BGE as defined in this credit agreement was 43%.


      125


      Table of Contents

              Decreases in Constellation Energy's or BGE's credit ratings would not trigger an early payment on any of our, or BGE's, credit facilities. However, the impact of a credit ratings downgrade on our financial ratios associated with our credit facility covenants would depend on our financial condition at the time of such a downgrade and on the source of funds used to satisfy the incremental collateral obligation resulting from a credit ratings downgrade. For example, if we were to use existing cash balances to fund the cash portion of any additional collateral obligations resulting from a credit ratings downgrade, we would not expect a material impact on our financial ratios. However, if we were to issue long-term debt or use our credit facilities to fund any additional collateral obligations, our financial ratios could be materially affected. Failure by Constellation Energy, or BGE, to comply with these covenants could result in the agreements to allowacceleration of the issuancematurity of commercial paper.the borrowings outstanding and preclude us from issuing letters of credit under these facilities.


      126


      Table of Contents

      Capitalization

      We detail in the table below our total capitalization, which includes long-term debt, common stock, noncontrolling interests, and preference stock, as of December 31, 2010 and 2009.

      At December 31,
       2010
       2009
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Long-Term Debt

             
       

      Long-term debt of Constellation Energy

             
        

      8.625% Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures, due June 15, 2063

       $450.0 $450.0 
        

      7.00% Fixed-Rate Notes, due April 1, 2012

        213.5  700.0 
        

      4.55% Fixed-Rate Notes, due June 15, 2015

        550.0  550.0 
        

      5.15% Fixed-Rate Notes, due December 1, 2020

        550.0   
        

      7.60% Fixed-Rate Notes, due April 1, 2032

        700.0  700.0 
        

      Fair Value of Interest Rate Swaps

        36.2  38.6 
        
        

      Total long-term debt of Constellation Energy

        2,499.7  2,438.6 
        
       

      Long-term debt of nonregulated businesses

             
        

      Tax-exempt debt transferred from BGE effective July 1, 2000

             
         

      4.10% Pollution control loan, due July 1, 2014

        20.0  20.0 
        

      Tax-exempt variable rate notes, due April 1, 2024

        75.0  75.0 
        

      Tax-exempt variable rate notes, due December 1, 2025

          47.0 
        

      Tax-exempt variable rate notes, due December 1, 2037

          65.0 
        

      5.00% Mortgage note, due June 15, 2010

          0.4 
        

      7.3% Fixed Rate Note, due June 1, 2012

        1.7  1.7 
        

      Asset-based lending agreement due July 16, 2012

        18.0  27.1 
        
        

      Total long-term debt of nonregulated businesses

        114.7  236.2 
        
       

      Other long-term debt of BGE

             
        

      6.125% Notes, due July 1, 2013

        400.0  400.0 
        

      5.90% Notes, due October 1, 2016

        300.0  300.0 
        

      5.20% Notes, due June 15, 2033

        200.0  200.0 
        

      6.35% Notes, due October 1, 2036

        400.0  400.0 
        

      Medium-term notes, Series E

        131.5  131.5 
        
        

      Total other long-term debt of BGE

        1,431.5  1,431.5 
        
       

      6.20% deferrable interest subordinated debentures due October 15, 2043 to BGE wholly owned BGE Capital Trust II relating to trust preferred securities

        257.7  257.7 
       

      Rate stabilization bonds

        454.4  510.9 
       

      Unamortized discount and premium

        (3.9) (4.0)
       

      Current portion of long-term debt

        (305.3) (56.9)
        
       

      Total long-term debt

       $4,448.8 $4,814.0 
        


      127


      9Table of Contents

      At December 31,
       2010
       2009
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Equity:

             

      Noncontrolling Interests

       
      $

      88.8
       
      $

      75.3
       

      BGE Preference Stock

             
       

      Cumulative preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption, 6,500,000 shares authorized 7.125%, 1993 Series, 400,000 shares outstanding, callable at $101.07 per share until June 30, 2011, and at lesser amounts thereafter

        40.0  40.0 
       

      6.97%, 1993 Series, 500,000 shares outstanding, callable at $101.05 per share until September 30, 2011, and at lesser amounts thereafter

        50.0  50.0 
       

      6.70%, 1993 Series, 400,000 shares outstanding, callable at $101.01 per share until December 31, 2011, and at lesser amounts thereafter

        40.0  40.0 
       

      6.99%, 1995 Series, 600,000 shares outstanding, callable at $101.75 per share until September 30, 2011, and at lesser amounts thereafter

        60.0  60.0 
        
       

      Total BGE preference stock not subject to mandatory redemption

        190.0  190.0 
        

      Common Shareholders' Equity

             
       

      Common stock without par value, 600,000,000 shares authorized; 199,788,658 and 200,985,414 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. (At December 31, 2010, 12,818,160 shares were reserved for the long-term incentive plans, 8,788,849 shares were reserved for the shareholder investment plan, and 1,884,258 shares were reserved for the employee savings plan.)

        3,231.7  3,229.6 
       

      Retained earnings

        5,270.8  6,461.0 
       

      Accumulated other comprehensive loss

        (673.3) (993.5)
        
       

      Total common shareholders' equity

        7,829.2  8,697.1 
        

      Total Equity

        8,108.0  8,962.4 
        

      Total Capitalization

       $12,556.8 $13,776.4 
        

      Long-Term Debt,BGE Common Stock and Preference StockShareholder Equity

      At December 31,
       2010
       2009
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      Common Stock

       $1,293.1 $1,293.1 

      Retained Earnings

        779.5  645.1 

      Accumulated other comprehensive income

        0.6  0.6 
        

      Total BGE common shareholder equity

       $2,073.2 $1,938.8 
        

      Certain prior-period amounts have been reclassified to conform with the current period's presentation.

      Long-term Debt

      Long-term debt matures in one year or more from the date of issuance. The long-term debt of Constellation Energy and BGE do not contain material adverse change clauses. We detail our long-term debt in our Consolidated Statements of Capitalization. As you read this section, it may be helpful to refer to those statements.the table above.

      Constellation Energy

      5.15% Notes due December 1, 2020

      In December 2007,2010, we issued $65.0$550 million of tax-exempt variable5.15% Notes due December 1, 2020. Interest is payable semi-annually on June 1 and December 1, beginning June 1, 2011. At any time prior to September 1, 2020, we may redeem some or all of the notes at a price equal to the greater of 100% of the principal amount of the notes outstanding to be redeemed and the sum of the present values of the remaining scheduled payments of principal and interest on the notes being redeemed, discounted to the redemption date on a semi-annual basis at the Treasury rate plus 30 basis points, plus accrued interest. After September 1, 2020, we may redeem some or all of the notes at a price equal to finance100% of the acquisition, construction, installation and equippingprincipal amount of certain sewage and solid waste disposal facilities at onethe notes outstanding to be redeemed plus accrued interest on the principal amount being redeemed to the redemption date.

              Additionally, in December 2010, we issued a notice to redeem $213.5 million of our coal-fired power plants in Maryland.

              On October 31, 2006, CEP entered into a $200.0 million secured revolving credit facility, and at December 31, 2006, CEP had $22.0 million7.00% Notes, which represented the remaining outstanding 7.00% Notes due April 1, 2012. As such, we classified these notes as "Current portion of borrowings outstanding under this facility. However, during 2007, CEP issued additional equity to the public and our ownership percentage fell below 50 percent. Therefore, we deconsolidated CEP and began accounting for our investment using the equity method of accounting. As a result, the borrowings outstanding under the CEP credit facility at the time of deconsolidation are no longer includedlong-term debt" in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. In January 2011, we redeemed these notes with part of the proceeds from the issuance of the $550 million 5.15% Notes, terminated the associated interest rate swaps, and recognized a pre-tax loss of approximately $5 million on this transaction.

              During February 2011, we entered into interest rate swaps qualifying as fair value hedges related to $350 million of our fixed rate debt maturing in 2015. We also entered into $150 million of interest rate swaps related to our fixed rate debt maturing in 2020 that do not qualify as fair value hedges, and will be marked to market through earnings. These swaps effectively converted $500 million notional amount of fixed rate debt to floating rate for the term of the swaps.

              We discuss our interest rate swaps inNote 13.


      128


      Table of Contents

      Upstream Gas Property Asset-Based Lending Agreement

      In July 2009, we entered into a three year asset-based lending agreement associated with certain upstream gas properties that we own. At December 31, 2010, the borrowing base committed under the facility was $100 million, of which $18.0 million has been utilized and reflected in "Long-term debt" in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. The size of the facility may be increased up to $200 million with additional commitments by the lenders. Any debt issued under this facility is secured by the upstream gas properties, and the lenders do not have recourse against Constellation Energy in the event of a default. Interest is payable quarterly in March, June, September, and December.

              This asset-based lending agreement contains a provision that requires certain of our entities that own our upstream gas properties to maintain a current ratio of one-to-one. As of December 31, 2010, these entities were in compliance with this provision.

      Voluntary Debt Retirements

      As part of our voluntary commitment to reduce our debt by $1 billion with funds received from the EDF transaction, we retired the following debt completing this commitment.

      7.00% Notes due April 1, 2012

      In February 2010, we retired an aggregate principal amount of $486.5 million of our 7.00% Notes due April 1, 2012 pursuant to a cash tender offer, at a premium of approximately 11%. We recorded a loss on this transaction of $51.6 million within "Interest expense" on our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

      Tax-Exempt Notes

      During 2009, we retired approximately $150 million of variable rate tax exempt notes prior to maturity. In March, 2010, we repurchased our outstanding $47 million and $65 million variable rate tax-exempt notes. Since these notes are variable rate instruments, there was no gain or loss recorded upon repurchase.

      Zero Coupon Senior Notes

      In November 2009, we redeemed an aggregate principal amount of $267.6 million for the Zero Coupon Senior Notes early and recognized a pre-tax loss on redemption of $16.0 million. We recorded the loss within "Interest expense" in the Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

      BGE

      BGE's First Refunding Mortgage BondsSecured Indenture

      BGE'sBGE entered into a secured indenture in July 2009. The secured indenture creates a first refunding mortgage bonds are secured by a mortgagepriority lien on substantially all of its assets. The generating assets BGE transferred to subsidiaries of Constellation Energy also remain subject toBGE's electric utility distribution equipment and fixtures and on BGE's franchises, permits, and licenses that are transferable and necessary for the lien of BGE's mortgage, along with the stock of Safe Harbor Water Power Corporation and Constellation Enterprises, Inc. We expect the assets to be released from this lien following payment in March 2008operation of the last seriesequipment and fixtures. As of December 31, 2010, BGE has not issued any secured bonds outstanding under the mortgage and the subsequent discharge of the mortgage.

              BGE is required to make an annual sinking fund payment each August 1 to the mortgage trustee. The amount of the payment is equal to 1% of the highest principal amount of bonds outstanding during the preceding 12 months. The trustee uses these funds to retire bonds from any series through repurchases or calls for early redemption. However, the trustee cannot call the 65/8% Series, due 2008 outstanding bonds for early redemption.this indenture.

      BGE's Rate Stabilization Bonds

      In June 2007, BondCo, a subsidiary of BGE, issued an aggregate principal amount of $623.2 million of rate stabilization bonds to recover deferred power purchase costs. We discuss BondCo in more detail inNote 4. Below are the details of the rate stabilization bonds:bonds at December 31, 2010:

      Principal
       Interest Rate
       Scheduled
      Maturity Date


      $284.0 5.47%October 2012
        220.0 5.72 April 2016
        119.2 5.82 April 2017

      Principal
       Interest Rate
       Scheduled
      Maturity Date

       

      $115.2

        5.47%October 2012

      220.0

        5.72 April 2016

      119.2

        5.82 April 2017

              The bonds are secured primarily by a usage-based, non-bypassable charge payable by all of BGE's residential electric customers over the nexta ten years.year period. The charges will be adjusted semi-annually to ensure that the aggregate charges collected are sufficient to pay principal and interest on the bonds, as well as certain on-going costs of administering and servicing the bonds. BondCo cannot use the charges collected to satisfy any other obligations. BondCo's assets are not assets of any affiliate and are not available to pay creditors of any affiliate of BondCo. If BondCo is unable to make principal and interest payments on the bonds, neither Constellation Energy, nor BGE, are required to make the payments on behalf of BondCo.

      BGE's Other Long-Term Debt

      On July 1, 2000, BGE transferred $278.0 million of tax-exempt debt to our merchant energyGeneration business related to the transferred generating assets. At December 31, 2007,2010, BGE remains contingently liable for the $147.8$20 million outstanding balance of this debt.

              We show the weighted-average interest rates and maturity dates for BGE's fixed-rate medium-term notesnote, series E, outstanding at December 31, 2007 in the following table.2010 has a weighted average interest rate of 6.73%, maturing between 2011 and 2012.

      Series
       Weighted-Average
      Interest Rate

       Maturity
      Dates


      E 6.66%2008-2012
      G 6.08%2008

      BGE Deferrable Interest Subordinated Debentures

      On November 21, 2003, BGE Capital Trust II (BGE Trust II), a Delaware statutory trust established by BGE, issued 10,000,000 Trust Preferred Securities for $250 million ($25 liquidation amount per preferred security) with a distribution rate of 6.20%.


              BGE Trust II used the net proceeds from the issuance of common securities to BGE and the Trust Preferred Securities to purchase a series of 6.20% Deferrable Interest Subordinated Debentures due October 15, 2043 (6.20% debentures) from BGE in the aggregate principal amount of $257.7 million with the same terms as the Trust Preferred Securities. BGE Trust II must redeem the Trust Preferred Securities at $25 per preferred security plus accrued but unpaid distributions when the 6.20% debentures are paid at maturity or upon any earlier redemption. BGE has the option to redeem the 6.20% debentures at any time on or after November 21, 2008 or at any time when certain tax or other events occur.

              BGE Trust II will use the interest paid on the 6.20% debentures to make distributions on the Trust Preferred


      129


      Table of Contents

      Securities. The 6.20% debentures are the only assets of BGE Trust II.

              BGE fully and unconditionally guarantees the Trust Preferred Securities based on its various obligations relating to the trust agreement, indentures, 6.20% debentures, and the preferred security guarantee agreement.

              For the payment of dividends and in the event of liquidation of BGE, the 6.20% debentures are ranked prior to preference stock and common stock.

      Revolving Credit Agreement

      On December 18, 2001, BGE's subsidiary, District Chilled Water Partnership (ComfortLink) entered into a $25.0 million loan agreement with the Maryland Energy Financing Administration (MEFA). The terms of the loan exactly match the terms of variable rate, tax exempt bonds due December 1, 2031 issued by MEFA for ComfortLink to finance the cost of building a chilled water distribution system. The interest rate on this debt resets weekly. These bonds, and the corresponding loan, can be redeemed at any time at par plus accrued interest while under variable rates. The bonds can also be converted to a fixed rate at ComfortLink's option.

      Debt Compliance and Covenants

      The credit facilities of Constellation Energy and BGE discussed inNote 8 have limited material adverse change clauses, none of which would prohibit draws under the existing facilities. The long-term debt indentures of Constellation Energy and BGE do not contain material adverse change clauses or financial covenants.

              Certain credit facilities of Constellation Energy contain a provision requiring Constellation Energy to maintain a ratio of debt to capitalization equal to or less than 65%. At December 31, 2007, the debt to capitalization ratio as defined in the credit agreements was 46%.

              The credit agreement of BGE contains a provision requiring BGE to maintain a ratio of debt to capitalization equal to or less than 65%. At December 31, 2007, the debt to capitalization ratio for BGE as defined in this credit agreement was 47%. At December 31, 2007, no amounts were outstanding under these agreements.

              Failure by Constellation Energy, or BGE, to comply with these covenants could result in the acceleration of the maturity of the debt outstanding under these facilities. The credit facilities of Constellation Energy contain usual and customary cross-default provisions that apply to defaults on debt by Constellation Energy and certain subsidiaries over a specified threshold.

              The BGE credit facility also contains usual and customary cross-default provisions that apply to defaults on debt by BGE over a specified threshold. The indenture pursuant to which BGE has issued and outstanding mortgage bonds provides that a default under any debt instrument issued under the indenture may cause a default of all debt outstanding under such indenture.

              Constellation Energy also provides credit support to Calvert Cliffs, Ginna, and Nine Mile Point to ensure these plants have funds to meet expenses and obligations to safely operate and maintain the plants.

      Maturities of Long-Term Debt

      OurAs of December 31, 2010, our long-term borrowings mature on the following schedule:

      Year
       Constellation
      Energy

       Nonregulated
      Businesses

       BGE
       Total

       
       (In millions)
        
      2008 $ $5.6 $350.0 $355.6
      2009  500.0  1.5  65.0  566.5
      2010    0.4  56.5  56.9
      2011    36.0  81.7  117.7
      2012  705.2  1.6  172.5  879.3
      Thereafter  1,256.6  323.9  1,489.4  3,069.9

      Total long-term debt at December 31, 2007 $2,461.8 $369.0 $2,215.1 $5,045.9

              At December 31, 2007, we had long-term loans totaling $339.8 million that mature after 2007, which are periodically remarketed and could require repayment prior to maturity following any unsuccessful remarketing. As a result of these provisions, at December 31, 2007, $25.0 million is classified as current portion of long-term debt at BGE.

      Year
       Constellation
      Energy

       Nonregulated
      Businesses

       BGE
       Total
       
        
       
       (In millions)
       

      2011

       $223.6 $ $81.7 $305.3 

      2012

          19.7  172.5  192.2 

      2013

            466.6  466.6 

      2014

          20.0  70.4  90.4 

      2015

        576.2    74.5  650.7 

      Thereafter

        1,699.9  75.0  1,277.9  3,052.8 
        

      Total

       $2,499.7 $114.7 $2,143.6 $4,758.0 
        

      Weighted-Average Interest Rates for Variable Rate Debt

      Our weighted-average interest rates for variable rate debt outstanding were:

      At December 31,
       2007
       2006
       

       
      Nonregulated Businesses
      (including Constellation Energy)
       
       Loans under credit agreements 3.77%3.69%
       Tax-exempt debt 3.53%3.63%
       Fixed-rate debt converted to floating* 6.43%6.26%

      At December 31,
       2010
       2009
       
        

      Nonregulated Businesses
      (including Constellation Energy)

             
       

      Loans under credit agreements

        4.50% 4.50%
       

      Tax-exempt debt

        0.30% 1.22%
       

      Fixed-rate debt converted to floating *

        1.23% 2.30%
      *
      As discussed in Note 13, as of December 31, 2010, we have entered into interest rate swaps relating to $450.0$400.0 million of our fixed-rate debt. In January 2011, we terminated $200.0 million of these swaps.


      Common Stock

      Share Repurchase Program

      In October 2007, our board of directors approved a common share repurchase program for up to $1 billion of our outstanding common shares. Subsequent to this approval, on October 31, 2007, we entered into an accelerated share repurchase agreement with a financial institution to repurchase a total of $250.0 million, and, on November 2, 2007, we purchased 2,023,527 of outstanding shares of our common stock, which represents the minimum number of shares deliverable under the agreement, for a total of $187.5 million.

              We account for the accelerated share repurchase agreement as two separate transactions: as shares of common stock acquired at cost and a forward contract indexed to our own common stock. We accounted for the shares of common stock repurchased in November as a reduction to common shareholders' equity at cost. We accounted for the forward contract as a component of common shareholders' equity at fair value, which totaled $62.5 million at inception. The forward contract was settled on January 23, 2008 based on a discount to the volume-weighted average trading price of our common stock during that period. As a result, the financial institution delivered 514,376 additional shares to us to complete the transaction.

              The remainder of the common share repurchase program is expected to be executed over the next 24 months in a manner that preserves flexibility to pursue additional strategic investment opportunities.

      Preference Stock

      Each series of BGE preference stock has no voting power, except for the following:

        the preference stock has one vote per share on any charter amendment which would create or authorize any shares of stock ranking prior to or on a parity with the preference stock as to either dividends or distribution of assets, or which would substantially adversely affect the contract rights, as expressly set forth in BGE's charter, of the preference stock, each of which requires the affirmative vote of two-thirds of all the shares of preference stock outstanding; and
        whenever BGE fails to pay full dividends on the preference stock and such failure continues for one year, the preference stock shall have one vote per share on all matters, until and unless such dividends shall have been paid in full. Upon liquidation, the holders of the preference stock of each series outstanding are entitled to receive the par amount of their shares and an amount equal to the unpaid accrued dividends.

      Dividend Restrictions

      Constellation Energy

      Constellation Energy pays dividends on its common stock after its Board of Directors declares them. There are no contractual limitations on Constellation Energy paying common stock dividends, unless Constellation Energy elects to defer interest payments on the 8.625% Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures due June 15, 2063, and any deferred interest remains unpaid.

      BGE

      BGE pays dividends on its common stock after its Board of Directors declares them. However, pursuant to the order issued by the Maryland PSC on October 30, 2009 in connection with its approval of the transaction with EDF, BGE cannot pay dividends to Constellation Energy if (a) after the dividend payment, BGE's equity ratio would be below 48% as calculated pursuant to the Maryland PSC's ratemaking precedents or (b) BGE's senior unsecured credit rating is rated by two of the three major credit rating agencies below investment grade.


        130


        Table of Contents

        10Taxes

        The components of income tax expense are as follows:

        Year Ended December 31,
         2007
         2006
         2005
         

         
         
         (Dollar amounts in millions)
         
        Income Taxes          
         Current          
          Federal $168.2 $246.3 $14.3 
          State  40.6  37.2  32.7 

         
         Current taxes charged to expense  208.8  283.5  47.0 
         Deferred          
          Federal  184.7  50.7  107.9 
          State  41.5  23.7  16.1 

         
         Deferred taxes charged to expense  226.2  74.4  124.0 
         Investment tax credit adjustments  (6.7) (6.9) (7.1)

         
         Income taxes per Consolidated Statements of Income $428.3 $351.0 $163.9 

         

        Year Ended December 31,
         2010
         2009
         2008
         
          
         
         (Dollar amounts in millions)
         

        Income Taxes

                  
         

        Current

                  
          

        Federal

         $(46.9)$891.5 $2.8 
          

        State

          102.0  260.4  48.1 
          
         

        Current taxes charged to expense

          55.1  1,151.9  50.9 
         

        Deferred

                  
          

        Federal

          (521.4) 1,474.5  (101.6)
          

        State

          (194.9) 372.5  (21.2)
          
         

        Deferred taxes (credited) charged to expense

          (716.3) 1,847.0  (122.8)
         

        Investment tax credit adjustments

          (4.5) (12.1) (6.4)
          
         

        Income taxes per Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss)

         $(665.7)$2,986.8 $(78.3)
          

                Total income taxes are different from the amount that would be computed by applying the statutory Federal income tax rate of 35% to book income before income taxes as follows:

        Reconciliation of Income Taxes Computed at Statutory Federal Rate to Total Income Taxes          
         Income from continuing opera- tions before income taxes (excluding BGE preference stock dividends) $1,263.9 $1,112.8 $713.0 
          Statutory federal income tax rate  35%  35%  35% 

         
          Income taxes computed at statu- tory federal rate  442.4  389.5  249.5 
          Increases (decreases) in income taxes due to          
           Depreciation differences not nor- malized on regulated activities  3.7  3.6  3.8 
           Amortization of deferred investment tax credits  (6.7) (6.9) (7.1)
           Synthetic fuel tax credits flowed through to income  (166.2) (120.2) (114.9)
           Estimated synthetic fuel tax credit phase-out  110.3  44.3   
           State income taxes, net of fed- eral income tax benefit  53.4  42.6  31.5 
           Merger-related transaction costs    (5.3) 5.3 
           Other  (8.6) 3.4  (4.2)

         
          Total income taxes $428.3 $351.0 $163.9 

         
         Effective income tax rate  33.9%  31.5%  23.0% 

         

                In 2007, the State of Maryland increased its corporate tax rate from 7% to 8.25% effective January 1, 2008. In accordance with SFAS No. 109,Accounting for Income Taxes, the impact from adjusting all existing deferred income tax assets and liabilities for the effect of changes in tax laws or rates should be included in operating results in the period that includes the enactment date. In 2007, we recognized a $0.7 million after-tax charge for the net impact of the changes in the Maryland tax rate on deferred income tax assets and liabilities, net of the related federal deferred income tax benefit. The impact to BGE is discussed below.

                Current income taxes will begin to be recorded at the higher Maryland corporate income tax rate effective in 2008 and will be reflected in our ongoing operating results beginning on January 1, 2008.

        Reconciliation of Income Taxes Computed at Statutory Federal Rate to Total Income Taxes

                  
         

        (Loss) Income from continuing operations before income taxes

         $(1,597.5)$7,490.2 $(1,396.7)
          

        Statutory federal income tax rate

          35% 35% 35%
          
          

        Income taxes computed at statutory federal rate

          (559.1) 2,621.6  (488.8)
          

        Increases (decreases) in income taxes due to

                  
           

        State income taxes, net of federal income tax benefit

          (60.4) 411.0  17.3 
           

        Merger-related transaction costs

            (79.3) 416.2 
           

        Interest expense on mandatorily redeemable preferred stock

            23.7  7.8 
           

        Qualified decommissioning impairment losses

            3.1  (28.5)
           

        Amortization of deferred investment tax credits

          (4.5) (12.1) (6.4)
           

        Noncontrolling interest operating results

          (13.1) (16.4) 6.0 
           

        Nondeductible international losses

            19.2   
           

        Other

          (28.6) 16.0  (1.9)
          
          

        Total income taxes

         $(665.7)$2,986.8 $(78.3)
          
         

        Effective income tax rate

          41.7% 39.9% 5.6%
          

                BGE's effective tax rate was 40.7%39.7% in 2007, 37.5%2010, 41.3% in 2006,2009, and 38.8%28.7% in 2005. The2008. In general, the primary difference between BGE's effective tax rate and the 35% statutory federal income tax rate is primarily relatedfor all years relates to Maryland corporate income taxes, net of the related federal income tax benefit. BGE's after-tax effective state rate of 7.6% for 2007 includes an adjustment of deferred income tax liabilities to reflect the November 19, 2007 enactment into law of a changeThe decrease in the Maryland corporate income tax rate, as discussed above. In 2006, BGE's effective tax rate includesin 2010 is primarily due to the benefitinclusion of merger-related costs incurreda loss on the sale of a noncontrolling interest in 2005pretax earnings in 2009 that were deductiblewas not included in 20062010 pretax earnings as a result of the terminationJanuary 2010 sale of the merger with FPL Group (0.5%) and a deduction for dividends paidthat interest. The increase in BGE's 2009 effective tax rate from 2008 is primarily due to higher taxable income. For 2008, BGE had lower taxable income related to the employee savings plan (0.5%).2008 Maryland settlement agreement, which increased the relative impact of favorable permanent tax adjustments on BGE's 2008 effective tax rate.


        131


        Table of Contents

                The major components of our net deferred income tax liability are as follows:

         
         Constellation Energy
         BGE
        At December 31,
         2007
         2006
         2007
         2006

         
         (In millions)
        Deferred Income Taxes            
         Deferred tax liabilities            
          Net property, plant and equipment $1,570.7 $1,539.1 $583.8 $524.2
          Qualified nuclear decommissioning trust funds  360.3  339.5    
          Regulatory assets, net  312.0  203.3  312.0  203.3
          Mark-to-market energy assets and liabilities, net  217.8  154.7    
          Other  122.6  185.1  12.2  72.7

          Total deferred tax liabilities  2,583.4  2,421.7  908.0  800.2
         Deferred tax assets            
          Asset retirement obligation  368.3  384.6    
          Defined benefit obligations  362.0  390.6  61.6  39.8
          Financial investments and hedging instruments  426.1  757.2    
          Deferred investment tax credits  20.4  22.1  4.8  4.7
          Other  118.8  105.7  11.9  10.6

          Total deferred tax assets  1,295.6  1,660.2  78.3  55.1

         Total deferred tax liability, net  1,287.8  761.5  829.7  745.1
         Less: Current portion of deferred tax (asset)/liability  (300.7) (674.3) 44.1  47.4

        Long-term portion of deferred tax liability, net $1,588.5 $1,435.8 $785.6 $697.7

         
         Constellation Energy BGE 
        At December 31,
         2010
         2009
         2010
         2009
         
          
         
         (In millions)
         

        Deferred Income Taxes

                     
         

        Deferred tax liabilities

                     
          

        Net property, plant and equipment

         $1,768.3 $1,189.5 $1,152.3 $920.1 
          

        Regulatory assets, net

          256.8  263.0  256.8  263.0 
          

        Derivative assets and liabilities, net

          (34.1) 329.6     
          

        Investment in CENG

          1,044.3  2,114.7     
          

        Other

          12.1  6.2  (80.0) (55.1)
          
          

        Total deferred tax liabilities

          3,047.4  3,903.0  1,329.1  1,128.0 
         

        Deferred tax assets

                     
          

        Defined benefit obligations

          249.0  311.7  (79.7) (23.7)
          

        Financial investments and hedging instruments

          111.4  337.0     
          

        Deferred investment tax credits

          10.9  13.0  3.2  3.8 
          

        Other

          129.8  163.7  20.6  71.5 
          
          

        Total deferred tax assets

          501.1  825.4  (55.9) 51.6 
          
         

        Total deferred tax liability, net

          2,546.3  3,077.6  1,385.0  1,076.4 
         

        Less: Current portion of deferred tax liability/(asset)

          56.5  (127.9) 30.1  (11.2)
          

        Long-term portion of deferred tax liability, net

         $2,489.8 $3,205.5 $1,354.9 $1,087.6 
          

        Synthetic Fuel Tax Credits

        Our merchant energy business has investments in facilities that manufacture solid synthetic fuel produced from coal as defined under the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) for which we can claim tax credits on our Federal income tax return through 2007. We recognize the tax benefit of these credits in our Consolidated Statements of Income when we believe it is highly probable that the credits will be sustained. The synthetic fuel process involves combining coal material with a chemical reagent to create a significant chemical change. A taxpayer may request a private letter ruling from the IRS to support its position that the synthetic fuel produced undergoes a significant chemical change and thus qualifies for synthetic fuel tax credits.

                We own a minority ownership in four synthetic fuel facilities located in Virginia and West Virginia. These facilities have received private letter rulings from the IRS. In 2004, the IRS concluded its examination of the partnership that owns these facilities for the tax years 1998 through 2001 and the IRS did not disallow any of the previously recognized synthetic fuel credits.

                We also have a 99% ownership in a South Carolina facility that produces synthetic fuel. We have received favorable private letter rulings from the IRS on the South Carolina facility. In 2006, the IRS concluded its examination of the partnership that owns the South Carolina facility for the 2003 and 2004 tax years and the IRS did not disallow any of the previously recognized synthetic fuel credits.

                The IRC provides for a phase-out of synthetic fuel tax credits if average annual wellhead oil prices increase above certain levels. To determine the amount of the phase-out, we are required to compare average annual wellhead oil prices per barrel as published by the IRS (reference price) to a Gross National Product inflation adjusted oil price for the year, also published by the IRS. The reference price is determined based on wellhead prices for all domestic oil production as published by the Energy Information Administration (EIA). For 2007, we estimate the tax credit reduction would begin if the reference price exceeds approximately $56 per barrel and would be fully phased out if the reference price exceeds approximately $71 per barrel.

                Based on monthly EIA published wellhead oil prices for the ten months ended October 31, 2007 and November and December NYMEX prices for light, sweet, crude oil (adjusted for the 2007 difference between EIA and NYMEX prices), we estimate a 70% tax credit phase-out in 2007. We recorded the effect of this phase-out estimate as a reduction in tax credits of $110.3 million during 2007.

                While we believe the production and sale of synthetic fuel from all of our synthetic fuel facilities meet the conditions to qualify for tax credits under the IRC, we cannot predict the timing or outcome of any future challenge by the IRS, legislative or regulatory action, or the ultimate impact of such events on the synthetic fuel tax credits that we have claimed to date, but the impact could be material to our financial results.


        Income Tax Audits

        We file income tax returns in the United States and foreign jurisdictions. With few exceptions, we are no longer subject to U.S. federal, state and local, or non-U.S. income tax examinations by tax authorities for the years before 2002.2005. In February 2008,2009, the IRS completedexpanded its examinationcurrent audit of our consolidated federal income tax returns for the tax years 20022005 through 2004. We intend2007 to file an administrative appeal of certain audit adjustments made byinclude the IRS as part of its examination.2008 tax year. Although the final outcome of the 2002-20042005-2008 IRS audit and future tax audits is uncertain, we believe that adequate provisions for income taxes have been made for potential liabilities resulting from such matters.

        Unrecognized Tax Benefits

        The following table summarizes our total unrecognized tax benefits at January 1, 2007, the date of adoption of FIN 48:

        At January 1, 2007
          

         
         (In millions)
        Total liabilities reflected in our balance sheet for unrecognized tax benefits of $56.7 million less $12.1 million of interest and penalties $44.6
        Other unrecognized tax benefits not reflected in our balance sheet  59.4

        Total unrecognized tax benefits $104.0

        The adoption of FIN 48 did not have a material impact on BGE's financial results.

                Other unrecognized tax benefits relate to outstanding federal and state refund claims for which no tax benefit was previously provided in our financial statements because the claims do not meet the "more-likely-than-not" threshold. Included in this amount is $52.0 million of refund claims that have been disallowed by the applicable tax authorities for which we assess the probability of tax benefit recognition to be remote. We discuss the adoption of FIN 48 in more detail inNote 1.

        The following table summarizes the change in unrecognized tax benefits during 20072010 and 2009 and our total unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2007:2010 and 2009:

        At December 31, 2007
          
         

         
         
         (In millions)
         
        Total unrecognized tax benefits, January 1, 2007 $104.0 
        Increases in tax positions related to the current year  13.3 
        Increases in tax positions related to prior years  3.8 
        Reductions in tax positions related to prior years  (6.0)
        Reductions in tax positions as a result of a lapse of the applicable statute of limitations  (0.6)

         
        Total unrecognized tax benefits, December 31, 2007 (1) $114.5 

         

         
         2010
         2009
         
          
         
         (In millions)
         

        Total unrecognized tax benefits, January 1

         $312.5 $189.7 

        Increases in tax positions related to the current year

          5.9  101.5 

        Increases in tax positions related to prior years

          26.0  148.4 

        Reductions in tax positions related to prior years

          (104.0) (126.3)

        Reductions in tax positions as a result of a lapse of the applicable statute of limitations

          (0.6) (0.8)
          

        Total unrecognized tax benefits, December 31 (1)

         $239.8 $312.5 
          
        (1)
        BGE's portion of our total unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 20072010 and 2009 was $17.8 million.$72.9 million and $111.8 million, respectively.

                Increases in current and prior year tax positions and reductions in prior year tax positions are primarily due toIf the total amount of unrecognized tax benefits for repair deductions measured at amounts consistent with proposed IRS adjustments for prior years. There was no significant change inof $239.8 million were ultimately realized, our income tax expense would decrease by approximately $167 million. However, the $167 million includes state tax refund claims of $55.9 million that have been disallowed by tax authorities and are subject to appeals.


        132


        Table of Contents

                It is reasonably possible that unrecognized tax benefits could decrease within the next year by approximately $72.9 million as a result of 2007 activity.an expected settlement with the IRS regarding BGE's change of accounting method for tax purposes with respect to certain transmission and distribution expenditures. This decrease is not expected to have a material impact on BGE's financial condition or results of operation.

                Interest and penalties recorded in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss) as tax (benefit) expense relating to liabilities for unrecognized tax benefits were $4.7 millionas follows:

         
         For the Year Ended
        December 31,
         
         
         2010
         2009
         2008
         
          
         
         (In millions)
         

        Interest and penalties recorded as tax (benefit) expense

         $(6.3)$12.8 $(0.4)
          

        BGE's portion of interest and penalties was immaterial for the year ended December 31, 2007. As a result, accruedall years.

                Accrued interest and penalties recognized in our Consolidated Balance Sheets increased from $12.1were $16.8 million, at January 1, 2007 to $16.8of which BGE's portion was $3.8 million at December 31, 2007.

                If the total amount2010, and $23.1 million, of unrecognized tax benefits of $114.5which BGE's portion was $1.6 million, as ofat December 31, 2007 were ultimately realized, our income tax expense would decrease by approximately $71 million. The $71 million includes the $52 million2009.


        133


        Table of disallowed refund claims discussed above.Contents

                In 2007, the IRS proposed certain adjustments to our 2002-2004 deductions for repairs and casualty losses. We do not anticipate the adjustments, if any, would result in a material impact on our financial results. However, we anticipate that it is reasonably possible that we will make an additional payment in the range of $20 to $25 million by December 31, 2008, which will reduce our liabilities for unrecognized tax benefits.


        11Leases

        There are two types of leases—operating and capital. Capital leases qualify as sales or purchases of property and are reported in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Our capital leases are not material in amount. All other leases are operating leases and are reported in our Consolidated Statements of Income.Income (Loss). We expense all lease payments associated with our regulated business. Lease expense and future minimum payments for long-term, noncancelable, operating leases are not material to BGE's financial results. We present information about our operating leases below.

        Outgoing Lease Payments

        We, as lessee, lease certain facilities and equipment. The lease agreements expire on various dates and have various renewal options. We also enter into certain power purchase agreements which are accounted for as operating leases. We classify power purchase agreements as leases if the agreement in substance provides us the ability to control the use of the underlying power generating facilities.

                Under these agreements, we are required to make fixed capacity payments, as well as variable payments based on actual output of the plants. We record these payments as "Fuel and purchased energy expenses" in our Consolidated Statements of Income.Income (Loss). We exclude from our future minimum lease payments table the variable payments related to the output of the plant due to the contingency associated with these payments.

                WeThrough June 2009, we also enterentered into time charter purchase agreements which entitleentitled us to the use of dry bulk freight vessels in the management of our global coal and logistics services. Certain of these contracts must be accounted for as leases. During 2007, we entered intoOur time charter leases withhave terms ranging in duration from 1 to 60 months. These arrangements do not include provisions for material rent increases and do not have provisions for rent holidays, contingent rentals or other incentives. In 2007,2010, 2009, and 2008, we recognized aggregate lease expense of approximately $535$11 million, $145 million and $477 million, respectively, related to 6512, 31 and 49 dry bulk freight vessels, respectively, hired under time charter arrangements. The average term of these arrangements is approximately 42-3 months. We record the payments as "Fuel and purchased energy expenses" in our Consolidated Statements of Income.Income (Loss).

                We recognized expense related to our operating leases as follows:

         
         Fuel and
        purchased
        energy
        expenses

         Operating
        expenses

         Total

         
         (In millions)
        2007 $758.7 $28.2 $786.9
        2006  162.6  24.7  187.3
        2005  103.2  24.8  128.0

         
         Fuel and
        purchased
        energy
        expenses

         Operating
        expenses

         Total
         
          
         
         (In millions)
         

        2010

         $227.9 $30.2 $258.1 

        2009

          385.6  37.2  422.8 

        2008

          664.8  38.0  702.8 

                At December 31, 2007,2010, we owed future minimum payments for long-term, noncancelable, operating leases as follows:

        Year
         Power
        Purchase
        Agreements

         Other
         Total

         
         (In millions)
        2008 $479.3 $26.3 $505.6
        2009  235.8  24.6  260.4
        2010  171.1  23.1  194.2
        2011  210.4  22.1  232.5
        2012  219.0  19.2  238.2
        Thereafter  782.8  109.7  892.5

        Total future minimum lease payments $2,098.4 $225.0 $2,323.4

        Year
         Power
        Purchase
        Agreements

         Other
         Total
         
          
         
         (In millions)
         

        2011

         $171.3 $30.8 $202.1 

        2012

          145.6  26.8  172.4 

        2013

          130.8  24.8  155.6 

        2014

          126.0  22.5  148.5 

        2015

          126.6  26.3  152.9 

        Thereafter

          72.6  35.7  108.3 
          

        Total future minimum lease payments

         $772.9 $166.9 $939.8 
          

        Sub-Lease Arrangements

        We provide time charters of dry bulk freight vessels as part of the logistical services provided to our global customers that qualify as sub-leases of our time charter purchase contracts. In 2007,2010, 2009, and 2008, we recorded sub-lease income of approximately $214$25 million, $114 million and $289 million, respectively, related to our time charter sub-leases. We did not have any material sub-lease income for 2006 or 2005. We record sub-lease income as part of "Nonregulated revenues" in our Consolidated Statements of Income.Income (Loss). As of December 31, 2007,2010, the future minimum rentals to be received for these time charters isare shown below:

        Year
         Time
        Charter
        Sub-Leases


         
         (In millions)
        2008 $109.2
        2009  30.7
        2010  
        2011  
        2012  
        Thereafter  

        Total future minimum lease rentals $139.9

        Year
         Time
        Charter
        Sub-Leases

         
          
         
         (In millions)
         

        2011

         $22.4 

        2012

          24.2 

        2013

          17.5 

        2014

          9.8 

        2015

          9.8 

        Thereafter

          28.6 
          

        Total future minimum lease rentals

         $112.3 
          


        134


        Table of Contents

        12Commitments, Guarantees, and Contingencies

        Commitments

        We have made substantial commitments in connection with our merchant energy,Generation, NewEnergy, and regulated electric and gas, and other nonregulated businesses. These commitments relate to:

          purchase of electric generating capacity and energy,
          procurement and delivery of fuels,
          the capacity and transmission and transportation rights for the physical delivery of energy to meet our obligations to our customers, and
          long-term service agreements, capital for construction programs, and other.

                Our merchant energy business entersGeneration and NewEnergy businesses enter into various long-term contracts for the procurement and delivery of fuels to supply our generating plant requirements. In most cases, our contracts contain provisions for price escalations, minimum purchase levels, and other financial commitments. These contracts expire in various years between 20082011 and 2020.2018. In addition, our merchant energyNewEnergy business enters into long-term contracts for the capacity and transmission rights for the delivery of energy to meet our physical obligations to our customers. These contracts expire in various years between 20082011 and 2019.2030.

                Our merchant energy businessGeneration and NewEnergy businesses also hashave committed to long-term service agreements and other purchase commitments for our plants.

                Our regulated electric business enters into various long-term contracts with differing terms for the procurement of electricity. TheseAs of December 31, 2010, these contracts representing approximately 66% of ourexpire between 2011 and 2013 and represent BGE's estimated requirements expire between 2008to serve residential and 2010. As discussed inNote 1, thesmall commercial customers as follows:

        Contract Duration
        Percentage of
        Estimated
        Requirements

        From January 1, 2011 to September 2011

        100%

        From October 2011 to May 2012

        75

        From June 2012 to September 2012

        50

        From October 2012 to May 2013

        25

                The cost of power under these contracts is fully recoverable and therefore is excluded fromunder the table later in this Note.Provider of Last Resort agreement reached with the Maryland PSC.

                Our regulated gas business enters into various long-term contracts for the procurement, transportation, and storage of gas. Our regulated gas business has gas procurement contracts that expire in 2011, and transportation and storage contracts that expire between 20082012 and 2028. These2027. The cost of gas under these contracts areis recoverable under BGE's gas cost adjustment clause discussed inNote 1, and therefore are excluded from the table later in this Note.

                Our other nonregulated businesses have committed to gas purchases and to contributions of additional capital for construction programs and joint ventures in which they have an interest.

        We have also committed to long-term service agreements and other obligations related to our information technology systems.

                At December 31, 2007,2010, we estimate our future obligations to be as follows:

         
         Payments
          
         
         2008
         2009-
        2010

         2011-
        2012

         Thereafter
         Total

         
         (In millions)
          
        Merchant Energy:               
         Purchased capacity and energy $425.2 $489.6 $213.8 $276.4 $1,405.0
         Fuel and transportation  1,825.1  1,503.5  649.7  918.9  4,897.2
         Long-term service agreements, capital, and other  146.8  12.6  6.8  17.8  184.0

        Total merchant energy  2,397.1  2,005.7  870.3  1,213.1  6,486.2
        Corporate and Other:               
         Long-term service agreements, capital, and other  50.5  5.7  0.7    56.9
        Regulated:               
         Purchase obligations and other  61.8  23.5  12.8  1.5  99.6

        Total future obligations $2,509.4 $2,034.9 $883.8 $1,214.6 $6,642.7

         
         Payments  
         
         
         2011
         2012-
        2013

         2014-
        2015

         Thereafter
         Total
         
          
         
         (In millions)
          
         

        Competitive Businesses:

                        
         

        Purchased capacity and energy

         $430.6 $503.0 $164.3 $263.6 $1,361.5 
         

        Purchased energy from CENG (1)

          488.4  1,761.2  1,735.5     3,985.1 
         

        Fuel and transportation

          535.7  449.9  250.2  176.0  1,411.8 
         

        Long-term service agreements, capital, and other

          6.6  11.5  7.4  5.4  30.9 
          

        Total competitive businesses

          1,461.3  2,725.6  2,157.4  445.0  6,789.3 

        Corporate and Other:

                        
         

        Long-term service agreements, capital, and other

          22.5  11.6  0.1    34.2 

        Regulated:

                        
         

        Purchase obligations and other

          23.9  6.9      30.8 
          

        Total future obligations

         $1,507.7 $2,744.1 $2,157.5 $445.0 $6,854.3 
          
        (1)
        As part of reaching a comprehensive agreement with EDF in October 2010, we modified our existing power purchase agreement with CENG to be unit contingent through the end of its original term in 2014. Additionally, beginning in 2015 and continuing to the end of the life of the respective plants, we agreed to purchase 50.01% of the available output of CENG's nuclear plants at market prices. We have included in the table our commitments under this agreement for five years, the time period for which we have more reliable data. Further, we continue to own a 50.01% membership interest in CENG that we account for as an equity method investment. See Note 16 for more details on this agreement.

        Long-Term Power Sales Contracts

        We enter into long-term power sales contracts in connection with our load-serving activities. We also enter into long-term power sales contracts associated with certain of our power plants. Our load-serving power sales contracts extend for terms through 2019 and provide for the sale of energy to electricityelectric distribution utilities and certain retail customers. Our power sales contracts associated with our power plants extend for terms into 20142016 and provide for the sale of all or a portion of the actual output of certain of our power plants. AllSubstantially all long-term contracts were executed at pricing that approximated market rates, including profit margin, at the time of execution.


        135


        Table of Contents

        Guarantees

        Our guarantees do not represent incremental Constellation Energy Group obligations; rather they primarily represent parental guarantees of subsidiary obligations. The following table summarizes the maximum exposure by guarantor based on the stated limit of our outstanding guarantees at December 31, 2007:guarantees:

        At December 31, 2007
         Stated Limit

         
         (In millions)
        Competitive supply guarantees $13,538.0
        Nuclear guarantees  807.8
        BGE guarantees  263.3
        Other non-regulated guarantees  105.3
        Power project guarantees  47.2

        Total guarantees $14,761.6


        At December 31, 2010
         Stated Limit
         
          
         
         (In billions)
         

        Constellation Energy guarantees

         $9.1 

        BGE guarantees

          0.3 
          

        Total guarantees

         $9.4 
          

                At December 31, 2007,2010, Constellation Energy had a total of $14,761.6 million$9.4 billion in guarantees in outstanding related to loans, credit facilities, and contractual performance of certain of its subsidiaries as described below.

          Constellation Energy guaranteed $13,538.0 milliona face amount of $9.1 billion as follows:
          $8.6 billion on behalf of our subsidiaries for competitive supply activities. These guarantees are put into place in orderGeneration and NewEnergy business to allow our subsidiariesit the flexibility needed to conduct business with counterparties without having to post other forms of collateral. While the face amount of these guarantees is $13,538.0 million, our calculated fair value ofOur estimated net exposure for obligations forunder commercial transactions covered by these guarantees was $3,460.6 millionapproximately $1.5 billion at December 31, 2007. If2010, which represents the total amount the parent company wascould be required to fund these subsidiary obligations, the total amount based on December 31, 20072010 market prices would be $3,460.6 million.prices. For those guarantees related to our derivative liabilities, the fair value of the obligation is recorded in our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
          Constellation Energy guaranteed $807.8 million$0.5 billion primarily on behalf of ourCENG's nuclear generating facilities mostly due tofor nuclear insurance and for credit support to ensure these plants have funds to meet expenses and obligations to safely operate and maintain the plants. We recorded the fair value of $11.1 million for these guarantees on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
          BGE guaranteed the Trust Preferred Securities of $250.0 million of BGE Capital Trust II, an unconsolidated investment, as discussedII.

        Contingencies

        Litigation

        In the normal course of business, we are involved in various legal proceedings. We discuss the significant matters below.

        Note 9Securities Class Action.

        BGE guaranteed two-thirds

        Three federal securities class action lawsuits have been filed in the United States District Courts for the Southern District of certain debtNew York and the District of Safe Harbor Water Power Corporation, an unconsolidated investment. At December 31, 2007, Safe Harbor Water Power Corporation had outstanding debt of $20.0 million.Maryland between September 2008 and November 2008. The maximum amount of BGE's guarantee is $13.3 million.

        Constellation Energy guaranteed $95.1 millioncases were filed on behalf of a proposed class of persons who acquired publicly traded securities, including the Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures (Debentures), of Constellation Energy between January 30, 2008 and September 16, 2008, and who acquired Debentures in an offering completed in June 2008. The securities class actions generally allege that Constellation Energy, a number of its present or former officers or directors, and the underwriters violated the securities laws by issuing a false and misleading registration statement and prospectus in connection with Constellation Energy's June 27, 2008 offering of Debentures. The securities class actions also allege that Constellation Energy issued false or misleading statements or was aware of material undisclosed information which contradicted public statements including in connection with its announcements of financial results for 2007, the fourth quarter of 2007, the first quarter of 2008 and the second quarter of 2008 and the filing of its first quarter 2008 Form 10-Q. The securities class actions seek, among other things, certification of the cases as class actions, compensatory damages, reasonable costs and expenses, including counsel fees, and rescission damages.

                The Southern District of New York granted the defendants' motion to transfer the two securities class actions filed there to the District of Maryland, and the actions have since been transferred for coordination with the securities class action filed there. On June 18, 2009, the court appointed a lead plaintiff, who filed a consolidated amended complaint on September 17, 2009. On November 17, 2009, the defendants moved to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint in its entirety. On August 13, 2010, the District Court of Maryland issued a ruling on the motion to dismiss, holding that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim with respect to the claims of the common shareholders under the Securities Act of 1934 and restricting the suit to those persons who purchased debentures in the June 2008 offering. We are unable at this time to determine the ultimate outcome of the securities class actions or their possible effect on our, or BGE's financial results.

        Mercury

        Since September 2002, BGE, Constellation Energy, and several other nonregulated businesses primarilydefendants have been involved in numerous actions filed in the Circuit Court for loansBaltimore City, Maryland alleging mercury poisoning from several sources, including coal plants formerly owned by BGE. The plants are now owned by a subsidiary of Constellation Energy. In addition to BGE and performance bondsConstellation Energy, approximately 11 other defendants, consisting of pharmaceutical companies, manufacturers of vaccines, and manufacturers of Thimerosal have been sued. Approximately 70 cases, involving claims related to approximately 132 children, have been filed to date, with each claimant seeking $20 million in compensatory damages, plus punitive damages, from us.

                The claims against BGE and Constellation Energy have been dismissed in all of the cases either with prejudice based on rulings by the Court or without prejudice based on voluntary dismissals by the plaintiffs' counsel. Plaintiffs may attempt to pursue appeals of the rulings in favor of BGE and Constellation Energy once the cases are finally concluded as to all defendants. We believe that we have meritorious defenses and intend to defend the actions vigorously. However, we cannot predict the timing, or outcome, of these cases, or their possible effect on our, or BGE's, financial results.


        136


        Table of Contents

        Asbestos

        Since 1993, BGE and certain Constellation Energy subsidiaries have been involved in several actions concerning asbestos. The actions are based upon the theory of "premises liability," alleging that BGE and Constellation Energy knew of and exposed individuals to an asbestos hazard. In addition to BGE and Constellation Energy, numerous other parties are defendants in these cases.

                Approximately 485 individuals who were never employees of BGE or Constellation Energy have pending claims each seeking several million dollars in compensatory and punitive damages. Cross-claims and third party claims brought by other defendants may also be filed against BGE and Constellation Energy in these actions. To date, most asbestos claims which $25.0 million was recorded inhave been resolved have been dismissed or resolved without any payment and a small minority have been resolved for amounts that were not material to our Consolidated Balance Sheetsfinancial results.

                BGE and Constellation Energy do not know the specific facts necessary to estimate their potential liability for these claims. The specific facts we do not know include:

          the identity of the facilities at December 31, 2007.which the plaintiffs allegedly worked as contractors,
          Our other nonregulated business guaranteed $10.2 million primarily for performance bonds.the names of the plaintiffs' employers,
          Our merchant energy business guaranteed $47.2 million for loansthe dates on which and other performance guarantees relatedthe places where the exposure allegedly occurred, and
          the facts and circumstances relating to certain power projects in which we have an investment.the alleged exposure.

                We believe it is unlikely thatUntil the relevant facts are determined, we wouldare unable to estimate what our, or BGE's, liability might be. Although insurance and hold harmless agreements from contractors who employed the plaintiffs may cover a portion of any awards in the actions, the potential effect on our, or BGE's, financial results could be required to perform or incur any losses associated with guarantees of our subsidiaries' obligations.material.

        Contingencies

        Revenue Sufficiency Guarantee Costs

        During 2006, the FERC issued orders finding that the Midwest Independent System Operator (MISO) violated its tariff by incorrectly allocating revenue sufficiency guarantee (RSG) charges among market participants. In March 2007, after rejecting a methodology proposal from MISO, FERC ordered MISO to reallocate RSG costs based on its existing tariff back to the date of FERC's original order (April 2006). Based on this FERC order, we recorded an immaterial liability during 2007 in our Consolidated Balance Sheets for our share of the RSG charges. This liability was subsequently settled with MISO later in 2007.

        Environmental Matters

        Solid and Hazardous Waste

        The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and several state agencies have notified us that we are considered a potentially responsible party with respect to the clean-up of certain environmentally contaminated sites. We cannot estimate the final clean-up costs for all of these sites, but the current estimated costs for, and current status of, each site is described in more detail below.

        68th Street Dump

        In 1999, the EPA proposed to add the 68th Street Dump in Baltimore, Maryland to the Superfund National Priorities List, which is its list of sites targeted for clean-up and enforcement, and sent a general notice letter to BGE and 19 other parties identifying them as potentially liable parties at the site. In March 2004, we and other potentially responsible parties formed the 68th Street Coalition and entered into consent order negotiations with the EPA to investigate clean-up options for the site under the Superfund Alternative Sites Program. In May 2006, a settlement among the EPA and 19 of the potentially responsible parties, including BGE, with respect to investigation of the site became effective. The settlement requires the potentially responsible parties, over the course of several years, to identify contamination at the site and recommend clean-up options. BGE is fully indemnified by a wholly-ownedwholly owned subsidiary of Constellation Energy for most of the costs related to this settlement as well as anyand clean-up costs.of the site. The potential range of clean-up costs will not be known until the investigation is closer to completion. However, those costs could havecompletion, which is expected in early 2011. The completed investigation will provide a material effect on our financial results.

        Kanerange of remediation alternatives to the EPA, and Lombard

        Thethe EPA issued its record of decision for the Kane and Lombard Drum site located in Baltimore, Maryland on September 30, 2003, which specified the clean-up plan for the site, consisting of enhanced reductive dechlorination, a soil management plan, and institutional controls. An EPA order requiring cleanupis expected to select one of the sitealternatives by 18the end of 2011. In addition, the allocation of the costs among the potentially responsible parties including Constellation Energy, became effective in November 2006.is not yet known. The EPA estimates that total clean-up costs will be approximately $7 million. Our share of site-related costs will be 11.1% of the total. We recorded a liability in our Consolidated Balance Sheets for our share of the clean-up costs that we believe is probable.

        Spring Gardens

        In December 1996, BGE signed a consent order with the Maryland Department of the Environment that requires it to implement remedial action plans for contamination at and around the Spring Gardens site, located in Baltimore, Maryland. The Spring Gardens site was once used to manufacture gas from


        coal and oil. Based on remedial action plans and cost modeling performed in late 2006, BGE estimates its probable clean-up costs will total $43 million. BGE has recorded these costs as a liability in its Consolidated Balance Sheets and has deferred these costs, net of accumulated amortization and amounts it recovered from insurance companies, as a regulatory asset. Based on the results of studies at this site, it is reasonably possible that additional costsincur could exceed the amount BGE has recognized by approximately $3 million. Through December 31, 2007, BGE has spent approximately $41 million for remediation at this site.

                BGE also has investigated other small sites where gas was manufactured in the past. We do not expect the clean-up costs of the remaining smaller sites to have a material effect on our financial results.

        Air Quality

        In late July 2005, we received two NoticesJanuary 2009, the EPA issued a notice of Violation (NOVs) fromviolation (NOV) to a subsidiary of Constellation Energy, as well as the Placer County Air Pollution Control District, Placer County California (District) alleging thatother owners and the Rio Bravo Rocklin facility locatedoperator of the Keystone coal-fired power plant in Lincoln, California had violated certain District air emission regulations.Shelocta, Pennsylvania. We havehold a combined 50% ownership20.99% interest in the partnership which ownsKeystone plant. The NOV alleges that the Rio Bravo Rocklin facility.plant performed various capital projects beginning in 1984 without complying with the new source review permitting requirements of the Clean Air Act. The NOVs allege a total of 38EPA also contends that the alleged failure to comply with those requirements are continuing violations between January 2003 and March 2005 of eitherunder the facility'splant's air permit or federal, state, and county air emission standards related to nitrogen oxide, carbon monoxide, and particulate emissions, as well as violations of certain monitoring and reporting requirements during that time period.permits. The maximumEPA could seek civil penalties under the Clean Air Act for the alleged violations range from $10,000 to $40,000 per violation. Managementviolations.

                The owners and operator of the Rio Bravo Rocklin facility is currently discussingKeystone plant are investigating the allegations and have entered into discussions with the EPA. We believe there are meritorious defenses to the allegations contained in the NOVs with District representatives. ItNOV. However, we cannot predict the outcome of this proceeding and it is not possible to determine theour actual liability, if any, of the partnership that owns the Rio Bravo Rocklin facility.

                In May 2007, a subsidiary of Constellation Energy entered into a consent decree with the Maryland Department of the Environment to resolve alleged violations of air quality opacity standards at three fossil fuel plants in Maryland. The consent decree requires the subsidiary to pay a $100,000 penalty, provide $100,000 to a supplemental environmental project, and install technology to control emissions from those plants.this time.

        Water Quality

        In October 2007, a subsidiary of Constellation Energy entered into a consent decree with the Maryland Department of the Environment relating to groundwater contamination at a third party facility that was licensed to accept fly ash, a byproduct generated by our coal-fired plants. The consent decree requires the payment of a $1.0 million penalty, remediation of groundwater contamination resulting from the ash placement operations at the site, replacement of drinking water supplies in the vicinity of the site, and monitoring of groundwater conditions. We recorded a liability in our Consolidated Balance Sheets of approximately $5$10.6 million, which includes the $1 million penalty and our estimate of probable costs to remediate contamination, replace drinking water supplies, and monitor groundwater conditions.conditions, and otherwise comply with the consent decree. We have paid approximately $6.6 million of these costs as of December 31, 2010, resulting in a remaining liability at December 31, 2010 of $4.0 million. We estimate that it is reasonably possible that we could incur additional costs of up to approximately $10 million more than the liability that we accrued.

                InInvestment in CENG

        On November 2007,6, 2009, we completed the sale of a class action complaint was filed49.99% membership interest in Baltimore City Circuit Court alleging thatCENG to EDF. As a result of the subsidiary's ash placement operations at the third party site damaged surrounding properties. The complaint seeks injunctive and remedial relief relating to the alleged contamination and unspecified damages. We cannot predict the timing, or outcome, of this proceeding.

        Litigation

        In the normal course of business,sale, we now hold a 50.01% interest in CENG. As a 50.01% owner in CENG, we are involved in various legal proceedings. We discusssubject to certain capital contribution requirements, which may be greater than the significant matters below.

        Challenges to the Illinois Auction

        In March 2007, the Illinois Attorney General filed a complaint at FERC against the wholesale suppliers, including our wholesale marketing, risk managementamount planned and, trading operation, that were successful bidders in the recent Illinois auction. The complaint alleged that the rates resulting from the auction were not "just and reasonable" and requested that FERC commence a proceeding to determine if the rates were just and reasonable and to investigate evidence of price manipulation. In July 2007, the Illinois legislature approved comprehensive legislation to address several energy issues in the state. This legislation has been signed into law by the Governor of Illinois, and the Attorney General's claims have been dismissed.

                In addition, two class action complaints were filed in Illinois state court against these wholesale suppliers alleging that they engaged in deceptive practices, including colluding in setting prices and actual price fixing. The complaints requested unspecified damages in an amount to be proven at trial. These complaints were moved to federal court and on December 21, 2007 the federal court dismissed the actions without prejudice to the right of the plaintiffs to pursue claims at the FERC or at the Illinois Commerce Commission.

                We believe we have meritorious defenses to any claims challenging our conduct in the auction and intend to defend against any such claims vigorously. However, we cannot predict the timing, or outcome, of any such claims, or their possible effect on our financial results.

        Mercury

        Since September 2002, BGE, Constellation Energy, and several other defendants have been involved in numerous actions filed in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland alleging mercury poisoning from several sources, including coal plants formerly owned by BGE. The plants are now owned by a subsidiary of Constellation Energy. In addition to BGE and Constellation Energy, approximately 11 other defendants, consisting of pharmaceutical companies, manufacturers of vaccines, and manufacturers of Thimerosal have been sued. Approximately 70 cases, involving claims related to


        approximately 132 children, have been filed to date, with each claimant seeking $20 million in compensatory damages, plus punitive damages, from us.

                In rulings applicable to all but three of the cases, involving claims related to approximately 47 children, the Circuit Court for Baltimore City dismissed with prejudice all claims against BGE and Constellation Energy. Plaintiffs may attempt to pursue appeals of the rulings in favor of BGE and Constellation Energy once the cases are finally concluded as to all defendants. We believe that we have meritorious defenses and intend to defend the remaining actions vigorously. However, we cannot predict the timing, or outcome, of these cases, or their possible effect on our, or BGE's, financial results.

        Asbestos

        Since 1993, BGE and certain Constellation Energy subsidiaries have been involved in several actions concerning asbestos. The actions are based upon the theory of "premises liability," alleging that BGE and Constellation Energy knew of and exposed individuals to an asbestos hazard. In addition to BGE and Constellation Energy, numerous other parties are defendants in these cases.

                Approximately 538 individuals who were never employees of BGE or Constellation Energy have pending claims each seeking several million dollars in compensatory and punitive damages. Cross-claims and third-party claims brought by other defendants may also be filed against BGE and Constellation Energy in these actions. To date, most asbestos claims against us have been dismissed or resolved without any payment and a small minority have been resolved for amounts that were not material to our financial results. The remaining claims are currently pending in state courts in Maryland and Pennsylvania.

                BGE and Constellation Energy do not know the specific facts necessary to estimate its potential liability for these claims. The specific facts we do not know include:

          the identity of the facilities at which the plaintiffs allegedly worked as contractors,
          the names of the plaintiffs' employers,
          the dates on which and the places where the exposure allegedly occurred, and
          the facts and circumstances relating to the alleged exposure.

                Until the relevant facts are determined, we are unable to estimate what our, or BGE's, liability might be. Although insurance and hold harmless agreements from contractors who employed the plaintiffs may cover a portion of any awards in the actions, the potential effect on our, or BGE's, financial results could be material.

        Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel

        The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA) required the federal government through the Department of Energy (DOE), to develop a repository for, and disposal of, spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. The NWPA and our contracts with the DOE required the DOE to begin taking possession of spent nuclear fuel generated by nuclear generating units no later than January 31, 1998. The DOE has stated that it will not meet that obligation until 2017 at the earliest.

                This delay has required that we undertake additional actions related to on-site fuel storage at Calvert Cliffs and Nine Mile Point, including the installation of on-site dry fuel storage capacity at Calvert Cliffs. In January 2004, we filed a complaint against the federal government in the United States Court of Federal Claims seeking to recover damages caused by the DOE's failure to meet its contractual obligation to begin disposing of spent nuclear fuel by January 31, 1998. The case is currently stayed, pending litigation in other related cases.

                In connection with our purchase of Ginna, all of Rochester Gas & Electric Corporation's (RG&E) rights and obligations related to recovery of damages for DOE's failure to meet its contractual obligations were assigned to us. However, we have an obligation to reimburse RG&E for up to $10 million in recovered damages for such claims.

        Nuclear Insurance

        We maintain nuclear insurance coverage for Calvert Cliffs, Nine Mile Point, and Ginna in four program areas: liability, worker radiation, property, and accidental outage. These policies contain certain industry standard exclusions, including, but not limited to, ordinary wear and tear, and war.

                In November 2002, the President signed into law the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act ("TRIA") of 2002, which was extended by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Extension Act of 2005 and the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007. Under the TRIA, property and casualty insurance companies are required to offer insurance for losses resulting from Certified acts of terrorism. Certified acts of terrorism are determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in concurrence with the Secretary of State and Attorney General, and primarily are based upon the occurrence of significant acts of terrorism that intimidate the civilian population of the United States or attempt to influence policy or affect the conduct of the United States Government. Our nuclear liability, nuclear property and accidental outage insurance programs, as discussed later in this section, provide coverage for Certified acts of terrorism.

                If there were an accident or an extended outage at any unit of Calvert Cliffs, Nine Mile Point or Ginna, ittherefore, could have a substantialan adverse impact on our financial results.

                In addition, if the fair value of our investment in CENG declines to a level below our carrying value and the decline is considered other-than-temporary, we may write down the


        137


        Table of Contents

        investment to fair value, which would adversely affect our financial results. During 2010, we recorded an impairment on our investment in CENG. We discuss this impairment charge in more detail inNote 2.

                We are also exposed to the same risks to which CENG is exposed. CENG owns and operates three nuclear generating facilities and is exposed to risks associated with operating these facilities and the risks of a nuclear accident.

        Operating Risks

        The operation of nuclear generating facilities involve routine risks, including,

          mechanical or structural problems,
          inadequacy or lapses in maintenance protocols,
          cost of storage, handling and disposal of nuclear materials, including the availability or unavailability of a permanent repository for spent nuclear fuel,
          regulatory actions, including shut down of units because of public safety concerns,
          limitations on the amounts and types of insurance coverage commercially available,
          uncertainties regarding both technological and financial aspects of decommissioning nuclear generating facilities,
          terrorist attacks, and
          environmental risks.

        Nuclear Liability InsuranceAccidents

        Pursuant to the Price-Anderson Act, we areCENG is required to insure itself against public liability claims resulting from nuclear incidents to the full limit of public liability. This limit of liability consists of the maximum available commercial insurance of $300$375 million and mandatory participation in an industry-wide retrospective premium assessment program. The retrospective premium assessment is $100.6$117.5 million per reactor, per incident, increasing the total amount of insurance for public liability to approximately $10.8$12.6 billion. Under the retrospective assessment program, weCENG can be assessed up to $503$587.5 million per incident at any commercial reactor in the country, payable at no more than $75$87.5 million per incident per year. This assessment also appliesIn the event of a nuclear accident, the cost of property damage and other expenses incurred may exceed CENG's insurance coverage. As a result, uninsured losses or the payment of retrospective insurance premiums could each have a significant adverse impact to CENG's, and therefore, our financial results as a 50.01% owner in


        excess CENG. Each of our worker radiation claims insuranceConstellation Energy and is subject to inflation and state premium taxes. In addition,EDF has guaranteed the U.S. Congress could impose additional revenue-raising measures to pay claims.

        Worker Radiation Claims Insurance

        We participate in the American Nuclear Insurers Master Worker Program that provides coverage for worker tort claims filed for radiation injuries. Effective January 1, 1998, this program was modified to provide coverage to all workers whose nuclear-related employment began on or after the commencement dateobligations of reactor operations. Waiving the right to make additional claims under the old policy was a condition for coverage under the new policy. We describe the old and new policies below:

          All nuclear worker claims reported on or after January 1, 1998 are covered by a new insurance policy. The new policy provides a single industry aggregate limit of $200 million for occurrences of radiation injury claims against all those insured by this policy prior to January 1, 2003 and $300 million for occurrences of radiation injury claims against all those insured by this policy on or after January 1, 2003.
          All nuclear worker claims reported prior to January 1, 1998 are still covered by the old policy. Insureds under the old policies, with no current operations, are not required to purchase the new policy described above, and may still make claims against the old policies through 2007. If radiation injury claimsCENG under these old policies exceed the policy reserves, all policyholders could be retroactively assessed, with our share being upinsurance programs in proportion to $6.3 million. Effective December 31, 2007, the discovery period under the old policy expired. All claims are closed and no new claims can be filed.

                The sellers of Nine Mile Point retain the liabilities for existing and potential claims that occurred prior to November 7, 2001. In addition, the Long Island Power Authority, which continues to own 18% of Unit 2 at Nine Mile Point, is obligated to assume its pro rata share of any liabilities for retrospective premiums and other premium assessments. RG&E, the seller of Ginna, retains the liabilities for existing and potential claims that occurred prior to June 10, 2004. If claims under these policies exceed the coverage limits, the provisions of the Price-Anderson Act would apply.their respective membership interests.

        Nuclear Property and Accidental Outage Insurance

        Our policies provide $500 millionCENG's plants are provided property and accidental outage insurance through Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL). Prior to July 1, 2010, CENG was the member-insured of NEIL. Effective July 1, 2010, Constellation Energy and EDF became the members-insured through their ownership interest in primary coverage at each nuclear plant—Calvert Cliffs, Nine Mile Point,CENG. As the members-insured, Constellation Energy and Ginna. In addition, we maintain $1.77 billion of excess coverage at Ginna and $2.25 billion in excess coverageEDF have assigned the loss benefits under a blanket excess program offered by the industry mutual insurer at both Calvert Cliffs and Nine Mile Point. Under the blanket excess policy, Calvert Cliffs and Nine Mile Point share $1.0 billion of the total $2.25 billion of excess property coverage. Therefore, in the unlikely event of two full limit property damage losses at Calvert Cliffs and Nine Mile Point, we would recover $4.5 billion instead of $5.5 billion. This coverage currently is purchased through the industry mutual insurance company. If accidents atto CENG's plants, with CENG named as an additional insured by the mutual insurance company cause a shortfall of funds, all policyholders could be assessed, with our share being up to $97.4 million.

                Losses resulting from non-certified acts of terrorism are covered as a common occurrence, meaning that if non-certified terrorist acts occur against one or more commercial nuclear power plants insured by our nuclear property insurance company within a 12-month period, they would be treated as one event and the owners of the plants where the acts occurred would share one full limit of liability (currently $3.24 billion).party.

        Accidental Nuclear Outage Insurance

        Our policies provide indemnification on a weekly basis for losses resulting from an accidental outage of a nuclear unit. Coverage begins after a 12-week deductible period and continues at 100% of the weekly indemnity limit for 52 weeks and then 80% of the weekly indemnity limit for the next 110 weeks. Our coverage is up to $490.0 million per unit at Calvert Cliffs and Ginna, $420.0 million for Unit 1 of Nine Mile Point, and $401.8 million for Unit 2 of Nine Mile Point. This amount can be reduced by up to $98.0 million per unit at Calvert Cliffs and $84.0 million for Nine Mile Point if an outage of more than one unit is caused by a single insured physical damage loss.

        Non-Nuclear Property Insurance

        Our conventional property insurance provides coverage of $1.0 billion per occurrence for Certified acts of terrorism as defined under TRIA,the Terrorism Risk Insurance Extension Act of 2005 and the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007. Our conventional property insurance program also provides coverage for non-certified acts of terrorism up to an annual aggregate limit of $1.0 billion. If a terrorist act occurs at any of our facilities, it could have a significant adverse impact on our financial results.


        138


        Table of Contents

        13Hedging ActivitiesDerivatives and Fair Value of Financial InstrumentsMeasurements

        SFAS No. 133 Hedging ActivitiesUse of Derivative Instruments

        WeNature of Our Business and Associated Risks

        Our business activities primarily include our Generation, NewEnergy, regulated electric and gas businesses. Our Generation and NewEnergy businesses include:

          the generation of electricity from our owned and contractually- controlled physical assets,
          the sale of power, gas, and other energy commodities to wholesale and retail customers, and
          risk management services and energy trading activities.

                Our regulated electric and gas businesses engage in electricity and gas transmission and distribution activities in Central Maryland at prices set by the Maryland PSC that are exposedgenerally designed to recover our costs, including purchased fuel and energy. Substantially all of our risk management activities involving derivatives occur outside our regulated businesses.

                In carrying out our competitive business activities, we purchase and sell power, fuel, and other energy-related commodities in competitive markets. These activities expose us to significant risks, including market risk includingfrom price volatility for energy commodities and the credit risks of counterparties with which we enter into contracts. The sources of these risks include, but are not limited to, the following:

          the risks of unfavorable changes in power prices in the wholesale forward and spot markets in which we sell a portion of the power from our power generation facilities and purchase power to meet our load-serving requirements,
          the risk of unfavorable fuel price changes for the purchase of a portion of the fuel for our generation facilities under short-term contracts or on the spot market. Fuel prices can be volatile, and the price that can be obtained for power produced from such fuel may not change at the same rate as fuel costs.
          the risk that one or more counterparties may fail to perform under their obligations to make payments or deliver fuel or power,
          interest rate risk associated with variable-rate debt and the fair value of fixed-rate debt used to finance our operations; and
          foreign currency exchange rate risk associated with international investments and purchases of equipment and commodities in currencies other than U.S. dollars.

        Objectives and Strategies for Using Derivatives

        Risk Management Activities

        To lower our exposure to the risk of unfavorable fluctuations in commodity prices, interest rates, and the impact of market fluctuationsforeign currency rates, we routinely enter into derivative contracts, such as fixed-price forward physical purchase and sales contracts, futures, financial swaps, and option contracts traded in the price and transportation costs of electricity, natural gas, and other commodities.

        Commodity Prices

        Merchant Energy Business

        Our merchant energy business uses a variety of derivative and non-derivative instruments to manage the commodity price risk of our competitive supply activities and our electric generation facilities, including power sales, fuel and energy purchases, gas purchasedover-the-counter markets or on exchanges, for resale, emission credits, weather risk, freight and the market risk of outages. In order to manage these risks, we may enter into fixed-price derivative or non-derivative contracts to hedge the variability in future cash flows from forecasted sales of energy and purchases of fuel and energy.hedging purposes. The objectives for entering into such hedgeshedging transactions primarily include:

          fixing the price for a portion of anticipated future electricity sales at a level that provides an acceptable return onfrom our electric generation operations,
          fixing the price of a portion of anticipated fuel purchases for the operation of our power plants,
          fixing the price for a portion of anticipated energy purchases to supply our load-serving customers,
          fixing the price for a portion of anticipated sales of natural gas to customers, and
          fixingmanaging our exposure to interest rate risk and foreign currency exchange risks.

        Non-Risk Management Activities

        In addition to the use of derivatives for risk management purposes, we also enter into derivative contracts for trading purposes primarily for:

          optimizing the margin on surplus electricity generation and load positions and surplus fuel supply and demand positions,
          price discovery and verification, and
          deploying limited risk capital in an effort to generate returns.

        Accounting for Derivative Instruments

        The accounting requirements for derivatives require recognition of all qualifying derivative instruments on the balance sheet at fair value as either assets or liabilities.

        Accounting Designation

        We must evaluate new and existing transactions and agreements to determine whether they are derivatives, for which there are several possible accounting treatments. Mark-to-market is required as the default accounting treatment for all derivatives unless they qualify, and we specifically designate them, for one of the other accounting treatments. Derivatives designated for any of the elective accounting treatments must meet specific, restrictive criteria, both at the time of designation and on an ongoing basis. The permissible accounting treatments include:

          normal purchase normal sale (NPNS),
          cash flow hedge,
          fair value hedge, and
          mark-to-market.

                We discuss our accounting policies for derivatives and hedging activities and their impacts on our financial statements inNote 1.

        NPNS

        We elect NPNS accounting for derivative contracts that provide for the purchase or sale of a physical commodity that will be delivered in quantities expected to be used or sold over a reasonable period in the normal course of business. Once we elect NPNS classification for a portiongiven contract, we cannot subsequently change the election and treat the contract as a derivative using mark-to-market or hedge accounting.

        Cash Flow Hedging

        We generally elect cash flow hedge accounting for most of anticipated salesthe derivatives that we use to hedge market price risk for our physical energy delivery activities because hedge accounting more closely aligns the timing of earnings recognition and cash flows for the underlying business activities. Management monitors the


        139


        Table of Contents

        potential impacts of commodity price changes and, where appropriate, may enter into or purchases of freight and coal.

                The portion of forecastedclose out (via offsetting transactions) derivative transactions hedged may vary based upon management's assessment of market, weather, operational, and other factors.designated as cash flow hedges.

                Our merchant energy businessCommodity Cash Flow Hedges

        We have designated certain fixed-price forward contracts as cash-flow hedges of forecasted sales of energy and forecasted purchases of fuel and energy for the years 20072011 through 2016 under SFAS No. 133. Our merchant energy business2016. We had net unrealized pre-tax losses on these cash-flow hedges recorded in "Accumulated other comprehensive income"loss" of $1,498.7$388.0 million at December 31, 20072010 and $2,227.1$951.3 million at December 31, 2006.2009.

                We expect to reclassify $760.4$236.6 million of net pre-tax losses on cash-flow hedges from "Accumulated other comprehensive income"loss" into earnings during the next twelve months based on the market prices at December 31, 2007.2010. However, the actual amount reclassified into earnings could vary from the amounts recorded at December 31, 2007,2010, due to future changes in market prices. Additionally, for cash-flow hedges settled by physical delivery of the underlying commodity, "Reclassification of net gains on hedging instruments from OCI to net income" represents the fair value of those derivatives, which is realized through gross settlement at the contract price.

                In addition, during 2007,When we de-designated contracts previously designated as cash-flow hedges for which thedetermine that a forecasted transactionstransaction originally hedged arehas become probable of not occurring, and as a result we recognized a pre-tax loss of $24.4 million. The majority of the pre-tax lossreclassify net unrealized gains or losses associated with de-designated contracts in 2007 resultedthose hedges from the deconsolidation of CEP. During 2006, we de-designated contracts previously designated as cash-flow hedges for which the forecasted transactions originally hedged are probable of not occurring, and as a result we"Accumulated other comprehensive loss" to earnings. We recognized a pre-tax loss of $35.3 million. The majority of the pre-tax loss associated with de-designated contracts in 2006 resulted from the initial public offering of CEP and the sale of our gas-fired plants. During 2005, we terminated a contract previously designated as a cash-flow hedge. The forecasted transaction originally hedged was probable of not occurring and as a result we recognized a pre-tax loss of $6.1 million.

                Our merchant energy business also enters into natural gas storage contracts under which the gas in storage qualifies for fair value hedge accounting treatment under SFAS No. 133. We record changes in fair value of these hedges related to our retail competitive supply operations as a component of "Fuel and purchased energy expenses" in our Consolidated Statements of Income. We record changes in fair value of these hedges related to our wholesale competitive supply operations as a component of "Nonregulated revenues" in our Consolidated Statements of Income.

                We recorded in earnings the following pre-tax gains (losses) related to hedge ineffectiveness:

        Year ended December 31,
         2007
         2006
         2005
         

         
         
         (In millions)
         
        Cash-flow hedges $(31.4)$13.4 $(19.4)
        Fair value hedges  24.4  27.7  (2.2)

         
        Total $(7.0)$41.1 $(21.6)

         

                The ineffectiveness amounts in the table above exclude $7.3 million of pre-tax losses that we recognizedon such contracts:

        Year ended December 31,
         2010
         2009
         2008
         
          
         
         (In millions)
         

        Pre-tax losses

         $(0.3)$(241.0)$(31.7)
          

        Interest Rate Swaps Designated as a result of market price changes for the year ended December 31, 2007. These losses represent the change in fair value of derivatives that no longer qualify for cash-flow hedge accounting due to reduced price correlation between the hedge and the risk being hedged, but remain designated as hedges prospectively. In addition, we recognized a $3.8 million pre-tax loss in 2007 and a $8.9 million pre-tax gain in 2006 related to the change in value for the portion of our fair value hedges excluded from ineffectiveness testing.

        Regulated Gas BusinessCash Flow Hedges

        BGE uses basis swaps in the winter months (November through March) to hedge its price risk associated with natural gas purchases under its market-based rates incentive mechanism and


        under its off-system gas sales program. BGE also uses fixed-to-floating and floating-to-fixed swaps to hedge its price risk associated with its off-system gas sales. The fixed portion represents a specific dollar amount that BGE will pay or receive, and the floating portion represents a fluctuating amount based on a published index that BGE will receive or pay. BGE's regulated gas business internal guidelines do not permit the use of swap agreements for any purpose other than to hedge price risk. The impact of these swaps on our, and BGE's, financial results is immaterial.

        Regulated Electric Business

        BGE uses basis swaps to hedge its price risk associated with electricity purchases. BGE's regulated electric business internal guidelines do not permit the use of swap agreements for any purpose other than to hedge price risk. The impact of these swaps on our, and BGE's, financial results is immaterial.

        Interest Rates

        We use interest rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges to manage our interest rate exposures associated with new debt issuances and to manage our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates on variable rate debt, and to optimize the mix of fixed and floating-rate debt. The swaps used to manage our exposure prior to the issuance of new debt and to manage the exposure to fluctuations in interest rates on variable rate debt are designated as cash-flow hedges under SFAS No. 133, with the effective portion of gains and losses on these interest rate cash flow hedges, net of associated deferred income tax effects, is recorded in "Accumulated other comprehensive income"loss" in our Consolidated Statements of Common Shareholders' Equity and Comprehensive Income and Consolidated Statements of Capitalization, in anticipation of planned financing transactions.(Loss). We reclassify gains and losses on the hedges from "Accumulated other comprehensive income"loss" into "Interest expense" in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss) during the periods in which the interest payments being hedged occur.

                Accumulated other comprehensive loss includes net unrealized pre-tax gains on interest rate cash-flow hedges of prior debt issuances totaling $10.1 million at December 31, 2010 and $11.3 million at December 31, 2009. We expect to reclassify $0.9 million of pre-tax net gains on these cash-flow hedges from "Accumulated other comprehensive loss" into "Interest expense" during the next twelve months. We had no hedge ineffectiveness on these swaps.

        Fair Value Hedging

        We elect fair value hedge accounting for a limited portion of our derivative contracts including certain interest rate swaps. The objectives for electing fair value hedging in these situations are to manage our exposure and to optimize the mix of our fixed and floating-rate debt.

        Interest Rate Swaps Designated as Fair Value Hedges

        We use interest rate swaps useddesignated as fair value hedges to optimize the mix of fixed and floating-rate debt are designated as fair value hedges under SFAS No. 133.debt. We record any gains or losses on swaps that qualify for fair value hedge accounting treatment, as well as changes in the fair value of the debt being hedged, in "Interest expense,expense." and weWe record any changes in fair value of the swaps and the debt in "Derivative assets and liabilities" and changes in the fair value of the debt in "Long-term debt" in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. In addition, we record the difference between interest on hedged fixed-rate debt and floating-rate swaps in "Interest expense" in the periods that the swaps settle.

                "Accumulated other comprehensive income" includes net unrealized pre-tax gains on interest rate cash-flow hedges terminated upon debt issuance totaling $11.9 million atAs of December 31, 2007 and $12.5 million at December 31, 2006. We expect to reclassify $0.1 million of pre-tax net gains on these cash-flow hedges from "Accumulated other comprehensive income" into "Interest expense" during the next twelve months. We had no hedge ineffectiveness on these swaps.

                During 2004, to optimize the mix of fixed and floating-rate debt,2010, we entered intohave interest rate swaps qualifying as fair value hedges relating to $450$400 million of our fixed-rate debt maturing in 2012 and 2015, and converted this notional amount of debt to floating-rate. The fair value of these hedges was an unrealized gain of $11.8$35.7 million at December 31, 20072010 and $35.8 million at December 31, 2009 and was recorded as an increase in our "Derivative assets" and an increase in our "Long-term debt." The fair value of these hedges was an unrealized loss of $7.1 million at December 31, 2006 and was recorded as an increase in our "Derivative liabilities" and a decrease in our "Long-term debt." We had no hedge ineffectiveness on these interest rate swaps.

                In January 2011, we terminated $200 million of these interest rate swaps as a result of retiring all of our fixed-rate debt maturing in 2012 and received $13.8 million in cash.

                During February 2011, we entered into interest rate swaps qualifying as fair value hedges related to $350 million of our fixed rate debt maturing in 2015, and converted this notional amount of debt to floating rate. We also entered into $150 million of interest rate swaps related to our fixed rate debt maturing in 2020 that do not qualify as fair value hedges, which are discussed underMark-to-Market below.

        Hedge Ineffectiveness

        For all categories of commodity contract derivative instruments designated in hedging relationships, we recorded in earnings the following pre-tax gains (losses) related to hedge ineffectiveness:

        Year ended December 31,
         2010
         2009
         2008
         
          
         
         (In millions)
         

        Cash-flow hedges

         $(91.3)$11.3 $(121.0)

        Fair value hedges

            23.9  20.6 
          

        Total

         $(91.3)$35.2 $(100.4)
          

                We did not have any fair value hedges for which we have excluded a portion of the change in fair value from our effectiveness assessment.

        Mark-to-Market

        We generally apply mark-to-market accounting for risk management and trading activities for which changes in fair value more closely reflect the economic performance of the underlying business activity. However, we also use


        140


        Table of Contents

        mark-to-market accounting for derivatives related to the following activities:

          our competitive retail gas customer supply activities, which are managed using economic hedges that we have not designated as cash-flow hedges in order to match the timing of recognition of the earnings impacts of those activities to the greatest extent permissible,
          economic hedges of activities that require accrual accounting for which the related hedge requires mark-to-market accounting, and
          during February 2011, we entered into interest rate swaps related to $150 million of our fixed rate debt maturing in 2020, and converted this notional amount of debt to floating rate. However, these interest rate swaps do not qualify as fair value hedges and will be marked to market through earnings.

        Origination Gains

        We may record origination gains associated with commodity derivatives subject to mark-to-market accounting. Origination gains represent the initial fair value of certain structured transactions that our wholesale marketing, risk management, and trading operation executes to meet the risk management needs of our customers. Historically, transactions that result in origination gains have been unique and resulted in individually significant gains from a single transaction. We generally recognize origination gains when we are able to obtain observable market data to validate that the initial fair value of the contract differs from the contract price. Origination gains recognized in the past three years include:

          none in 2010,
          none in 2009, and
          $73.8 million pre-tax in 2008 resulting from 6 transactions.

        Termination or Restructuring of Commodity Derivative Contracts

        We may terminate or restructure in-the-money contracts in exchange for upfront cash payments and a reduction or cancellation of future performance obligations. The termination or restructuring of contracts allows us to lower our exposure to performance risk under these contracts. We had no such transactions for commodity derivative contracts in 2010, 2009 and 2008.

        Quantitative Information About Derivatives and Hedging Activities

        Background

        Effective January 1, 2009, we adopted an accounting standard that addresses disclosures about derivative instruments and hedging activities. This standard does not change the accounting for derivatives; rather, it requires expanded disclosure about derivative instruments and hedging activities regarding:

          the ways in which an entity uses derivatives,
          the accounting for derivatives and hedging activities, and
          the impact that derivatives have (or could have) on an entity's financial position, financial performance, and cash flows.

        Balance Sheet Tables

        We present our derivative assets and liabilities in our Consolidated Balance Sheets on a net basis, including cash collateral, whenever we have a legally enforceable master netting agreement with a counterparty to a derivative contract. We use master netting agreements whenever possible to manage and substantially reduce our potential counterparty credit risk. The net presentation in our Consolidated Balance Sheets reflects our actual credit exposure after giving effect to the beneficial effects of these agreements and cash collateral, and our credit risk is reduced further by other forms of collateral.

                The following table provides information about the types of market risks we manage using derivatives. This table only includes derivatives and does not reflect the price risks we are hedging that arise from physical assets or nonderivative accrual contracts within our Generation and NewEnergy businesses.

                As discussed more fully following the table, we present this information by disaggregating our net derivative assets and liabilities into gross components on a contract-by-contract basis before giving effect to the risk-reducing benefits of master netting arrangements and collateral. As a result, we must present each individual contract as an "asset value" if it is in the money or a "liability value" if it is out of the money, regardless of whether the individual contracts offset market or credit risks of other contracts in full or in part. Therefore, the gross amounts in this table do not reflect our actual economic or credit risk associated with derivatives. This gross presentation is intended only to show separately the various derivative contract types we use, such as commodities, interest rate, and foreign exchange.

                In order to identify how our derivatives impact our financial position, at the bottom of the table we provide a reconciliation of the gross fair value components to the net fair value amounts as presented in theFair Value Measurements section of this note and our Consolidated Balance Sheets.


        141


        Table of Contents

                The gross asset and liability values in the tables below are segregated between those derivatives designated in qualifying hedge accounting relationships and those not designated in hedge accounting relationships. Derivatives not designated in hedging relationships include our NewEnergy retail power and gas customer supply operation, economic hedges of accrual activities, the total return swaps entered into to effect the sale of the international commodities and Houston-based gas trading operations in 2009, and risk management and trading activities which we have substantially curtailed as part of our effort to reduce risk in our business. We use the end of period accounting designation to determine the classification for each derivative position.

        As of December 31, 2010
         Derivatives
        Designated as Hedging
        Instruments for
        Accounting Purposes

         Derivatives Not
        Designated As Hedging
        Instruments for
        Accounting Purposes

         All Derivatives
        Combined

         
          
        Contract type
         Asset
        Values (3)

         Liability
        Values (4)

         Asset
        Values (3)

         Liability
        Values (4)

         Asset
        Values (3)

         Liability
        Values (4)

         
          
         
         (In millions)
         
         

        Power contracts

         $1,167.9 $(1,362.8)$6,795.0 $(7,166.5)$7,962.9 $(8,529.3)
         

        Gas contracts

          1,902.3  (1,832.8) 3,390.1  (3,155.3) 5,292.4  (4,988.1)
         

        Coal contracts

          97.0  (48.6) 266.0  (259.7) 363.0  (308.3)
         

        Other commodity contracts (1)

              61.4  (61.6) 61.4  (61.6)
         

        Interest rate contracts

          35.7    34.4  (35.7) 70.1  (35.7)
         

        Foreign exchange contracts

              11.0  (8.4) 11.0  (8.4)
          

        Total gross fair values

         $3,202.9 $(3,244.2)$10,557.9 $(10,687.2)$13,760.8 $(13,931.4)

                 
         

        Netting arrangements (5)

                      (12,955.5) 12,955.5 
         

        Cash collateral

                      (28.4) 0.6 
                        

        Net fair values

                     $776.9 $(975.3)

                       

        Net fair value by balance sheet line item:

                           

        Accounts receivable (2)

                     $(16.4)   

        Derivative assets—current

                      534.4    

        Derivative assets—noncurrent

                      258.9    

        Derivative liabilities—current

                         (622.3)

        Derivative liabilities—noncurrent

                         (353.0)
                        

        Total Derivatives

                     $776.9 $(975.3)
          
        (1)
        Other commodity contracts include oil, freight, emission allowances, and weather contracts.

        (2)
        Represents the unrealized fair value of exchange traded derivatives, exclusive of cash margin posted.

        (3)
        Represents in-the-money contracts without regard to potentially offsetting out-of-the-money contracts under master netting agreements.

        (4)
        Represents out-of-the-money contracts without regard to potentially offsetting in-the-money contracts under master netting agreements.

        (5)
        Represents the effect of legally enforceable master netting agreements.


        142


        Table of Contents

        As of December 31, 2009
         Derivatives
        Designated as Hedging
        Instruments for
        Accounting Purposes

         Derivatives Not
        Designated As Hedging
        Instruments for
        Accounting Purposes

         All Derivatives
        Combined

         
          
        Contract type
         Asset
        Values (3)

         Liability
        Values (4)

         Asset
        Values (3)

         Liability
        Values (4)

         Asset
        Values (3)

         Liability
        Values (4)

         
          
         
         (In millions)
         
         

        Power contracts

         $1,737.3 $(2,292.1)$11,729.3 $(12,414.3)$13,466.6 $(14,706.4)
         

        Gas contracts

          1,860.6  (1,380.0) 4,159.1  (3,857.1) 6,019.7  (5,237.1)
         

        Coal contracts

          20.1  (40.8) 609.5  (627.2) 629.6  (668.0)
         

        Other commodity contracts (1)

          1.4  (0.8) 83.1  (32.1) 84.5  (32.9)
         

        Interest rate contracts

          35.8    28.5  (39.9) 64.3  (39.9)
         

        Foreign exchange contracts

              13.2  (9.0) 13.2  (9.0)
          

        Total gross fair values

         $3,655.2 $(3,713.7)$16,622.7 $(16,979.6)$20,277.9 $(20,693.3)

                 
         

        Netting arrangements (5)

                      (19,261.0) 19,261.0 
         

        Cash collateral

                      (92.6) 125.6 
                        

        Net fair values

                     $924.3 $(1,306.7)

                       

        Net fair value by balance sheet line item:

                           

        Accounts receivable (2)

                     $(348.7)   

        Derivative assets—current

                      639.1    

        Derivative assets—noncurrent

                      633.9    

        Derivative liabilities—current

                         (632.6)

        Derivative liabilities—noncurrent

                         (674.1)
                        

        Total Derivatives

                     $924.3 $(1,306.7)
          
        (1)
        Other commodity contracts include oil, freight, emission allowances, and weather contracts.

        (2)
        Represents the unrealized fair value of exchange traded derivatives, exclusive of cash margin posted.

        (3)
        Represents in-the-money contracts without regard to potentially offsetting out-of-the-money contracts under master netting agreements.

        (4)
        Represents out-of-the-money contracts without regard to potentially offsetting in-the-money contracts under master netting agreements.

        (5)
        Represents the effect of legally enforceable master netting agreements.

                The magnitude of and changes in the gross derivatives components in these tables do not indicate changes in the level of derivative activities, the level of market risk, or the level of credit risk. The primary factors affecting the magnitude of the gross amounts in the table are changes in commodity prices and the total number of contracts. If commodity prices change, the gross amounts could increase, even if the level of contracts stays the same, because separate presentation is required for contracts that are in the money from those that are out of the money. As a result, the gross amounts of even fully hedged positions could increase if prices change. Additionally, if the number of contracts increases, the gross amounts also could increase. Thus, the execution of new contracts to reduce economic risk could actually increase the gross amounts in the table because of the requirement to present the gross value of each individual contract separately.

                The primary purpose of these tables is to disaggregate the risks being managed using derivatives. In order to achieve this objective, we prepare this table by separating each individual derivative contract that is in the money from each contract that is out of the money and present such amounts on a gross basis, even for offsetting contracts that have identical quantities for the same commodity, location, and delivery period. We must also present these components excluding the substantive credit-risk reducing effects of master netting agreements and collateral. As a result, the gross "asset" and "liability" amounts for each contract type far exceed our actual economic exposure to commodity price risk and credit risk. Our actual economic exposure consists of the net derivative position combined with our nonderivative accrual contracts, such as those for load-serving, and our physical assets, such as our power plants. Our actual derivative credit risk exposure after master netting agreements and cash collateral is reflected in the net fair value amounts shown at the bottom of the table above. Our total economic and credit exposures, including derivatives, are managed in a comprehensive risk framework that includes risk measures such as economic value at risk, stress testing, and maximum potential credit exposure.

        Gain and (Loss) Tables

        The tables below summarize the gain and loss impacts of our derivative instruments segregated into the following categories:

          cash flow hedges,
          fair value hedges, and
          mark-to-market derivatives.

                The tables only include this information for derivatives and do not reflect the related gains or losses that arise from generation and generation-related assets, nonderivative accrual contracts, or NPNS contracts within our Generation and NewEnergy businesses, other than fair value hedges, for which


        143


        Table of Contents

        we separately show the gain or loss on the hedged asset or liability. As a result, for mark-to-market and cash-flow hedge derivatives, these tables only reflect the impact of derivatives themselves and therefore do not necessarily include all of the income statement impacts of the transactions for which derivatives are used to manage risk. For a more complete discussion of how derivatives affect our financial performance, see our accounting policy for Revenues, Fuel and Purchased Energy Expenses, and Derivatives and Hedging Activities inNote 1.

                The following tables present gains and losses on derivatives designated as cash flow hedges. As discussed more fully in our accounting policy, we record the effective portion of unrealized gains and losses on cash flow hedges in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss until the hedged forecasted transaction affects earnings. We record the ineffective portion of gains and losses on cash flow hedges in earnings as they occur. When the hedged forecasted transaction settles and is recorded in earnings, we reclassify the related amounts from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss into earnings, with the result that the combination of revenue or expense from the forecasted transaction and gain or loss from the hedge are recognized in earnings at a total amount equal to the hedged price. Accordingly, the amount of derivative gains and losses recorded in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss and reclassified from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss into earnings does not reflect the total economics of the hedged forecasted transactions. The total impact of our forecasted transactions and related hedges is reflected in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

        Cash Flow Hedges
          
          
          
         Year Ended December 31,
         
          
         
         Gain (Loss) Recorded
        in AOCI
          
         Gain (Loss)
        Reclassified from AOCI
        into Earnings
         Ineffectiveness Gain
        (Loss) Recorded
        in Earnings
         
         
         Statement of Income (Loss) Line Item
         
        Contract type:
         2010
         2009
         2010
         2009
         2010
         2009
         
          
         
         (In millions)
          
         

        Hedges of forecasted sales:

               

        Nonregulated revenues

                     
         

        Power contracts

         $144.5 $362.5   $(165.8)$(180.6)$8.9 $77.5 
         

        Gas contracts

          (59.1) (65.1)   90.8  (67.3) (0.3) 6.3 
         

        Coal contracts

            10.0      (229.9)    
         

        Other commodity contracts (1)

            6.8    (0.7) (0.4)   (6.2)

        Interest rate contracts

            (0.3)     (0.3)    

        Foreign exchange contracts

            2.5    (1.0) (1.1)    
          

        Total gains (losses)

         $85.4 $316.4 

        Total included in nonregulated revenues

         $(76.7)$(479.6)$8.6 $77.6 
          

        Hedges of forecasted purchases:

               

        Fuel and purchased energy expense

                     
         

        Power contracts

         $(377.4)$(1,056.0)  $(1,036.1)$(1,905.3)$(40.7)$(42.2)
         

        Gas contracts

          (141.5) 103.7    216.5  165.8  (64.3) (15.2)
         

        Coal contracts

          65.9  (77.7)   (34.6) (187.6) 4.9  (8.9)
         

        Other commodity contracts (2)

          (0.2) (12.3)   (0.3) 8.2  0.2   

        Foreign exchange contracts

                       
          

        Total losses

         $(453.2)$(1,042.3)

        Total included in fuel and purchased energy expense

         $(854.5)$(1,918.9)$(99.9)$(66.3)
          

        Hedges of interest rates:

               

        Interest expense

                     
         

        Interest rate contracts

                4.3  0.6     
          

        Total gains

         $ $ 

        Total included in interest expense

         $4.3 $0.6 $ $ 
          

        Grand total (losses) gains

         $(367.8)$(725.9)  $(926.9)$(2,397.9)$(91.3)$11.3 
          
        (1)
        Other commodity sale contracts include oil and freight contracts.

        (2)
        Other commodity purchase contracts include freight and emission allowances.


        144


        Table of Contents

                The following table presents gains and losses on derivatives designated as fair value hedges and, separately, the gains and losses on the hedged item. As discussed earlier, we record the unrealized gains and losses on fair value hedges as well as changes in the fair value of the hedged asset or liability in earnings as they occur. The difference between these amounts represents hedge ineffectiveness. Due to the sale of our Houston-based gas trading operation, we do not have any activity for fair value hedges related to gas contracts since the second quarter of 2009.

        Fair Value Hedges
         Year Ended December 31,
         
          
         
          
         Amount of Gain (Loss)
        Recognized in Income
        on Derivative
         Amount of Gain (Loss)
        Recognized in Income
        on Hedged Item
         
         
         Statement of Income (Loss) Line Item
         
        Contract type:
         2010
         2009
         2010
         2009
         
          
         
          
         (In millions)
         

        Commodity contracts:

                       
         

        Gas contracts

         Nonregulated revenues $ $40.6 $ $(16.7)

        Interest rate contracts

         Interest expense  18.0  (0.1) (15.6) 0.7 
          

        Total gains (losses)

           $18.0 $40.5 $(15.6)$(16.0)
          

                The following table presents gains and losses on mark-to-market derivatives, contracts that have not been designated as hedges for accounting purposes. As discussed more fully inNote 1, we record the unrealized gains and losses on mark-to-market derivatives in earnings as they occur. While we use mark-to-market accounting for risk management and trading activities because changes in fair value more closely reflect the economic performance of the activity, we also use mark-to-market accounting for certain derivatives related to portions of our physical energy delivery activities. Accordingly, the total amount of gains and losses from mark-to-market derivatives does not necessarily reflect the total economics of related transactions.

        Mark-to-Market Derivatives
         Year Ended December 31,
         
          
         
          
         Amount of Gain (Loss)
        Recorded in Income
        on Derivative
         
         
         Statement of Income (Loss) Line Item
         
        Contract type:
         2010
         2009
         
          
         
          
         (In millions)
         

        Commodity contracts:

                 
         

        Power contracts

         Nonregulated revenues $(26.2)$250.9 
         

        Gas contracts

         Nonregulated revenues  41.4  (360.0)
         

        Coal contracts

         Nonregulated revenues  13.3  14.0 
         

        Other commodity contracts (1)

         Nonregulated revenues  (15.4) (11.7)
         

        Coal contracts

         Fuel and purchased energy expense    (109.8)

        Interest rate contracts

         Nonregulated revenues  (2.3) (27.2)

        Foreign exchange contracts

         Nonregulated revenues  (1.2) 7.6 
          

        Total gains (losses)

           $9.6 $(236.2)
          
        (1)
        Other commodity contracts include oil, freight, uranium, weather, and emission allowances.

                In computing the amounts of derivative gains and losses in the above tables, we include the changes in fair values of derivative contracts up to the date of maturity or settlement of each contract. This approach facilitates a comparable presentation for both financial and physical derivative contracts. In addition, for cash flow hedges we include the impact of intra-quarter transactions (i.e., those that arise and settle within the same quarter) in both gains and losses recognized in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss and amounts reclassified from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss into earnings.

        Volume of Derivative Activity

        The volume of our derivatives activity is directly related to the fundamental nature and scope of our business and the risks we manage. We own or control electric generating facilities, which exposes us to both power and fuel price risk; we serve electric and gas wholesale and retail customers within our NewEnergy business, which exposes us to electricity and natural gas price risk; and we provide risk management services and engage in trading activities, which can expose us to a variety of commodity price risks. We conduct our business activities throughout the United States and internationally. In order to manage the risks associated with these activities, we are required to be an active participant in the energy markets, and we routinely employ derivative instruments to conduct our business.

                Derivative instruments provide an efficient and effective way to conduct our business and to manage the associated risks. We manage our generating resources and customer supply activities based upon established policies and limits, and we use


        145


        Table of Contents

        derivatives to establish a portion of our hedges and to adjust the level of our hedges from time to time. Additionally, we engage in trading activities which enable us to execute hedging transactions in a cost-effective manner. We manage those activities based upon various risk measures, including position limits, economic value at risk (EVaR) and value at risk (VaR), and we use derivatives to establish and maintain those activities within the prescribed limits. We are also using derivatives to execute, control, and reduce the overall level of our trading positions and risk as well as to manage a portion of our interest rate risk associated with debt and our foreign currency risk from non-dollar denominated transactions. Accordingly, the use of derivative instruments is integral to the conduct of our business, and derivative instruments are an important tool through which we are able to manage and mitigate the risks that are inherent in our activities.

                The following table presents information designed to provide insight into the overall volume of our derivatives usage. However, the volumes presented in this table are subject to a number of limitations and should only be used as an indication of the extent of our derivatives usage and the risks they are intended to manage.

                First, the volume information is not a complete representation of our market price risk because it only includes derivative contracts. Accordingly, this table does not present a complete picture of our overall net economic exposure, and should not be interpreted as an indication of open or unhedged commodity positions, because the use of derivatives is only one of the means by which we engage in and manage the risks of our business. For example, the table does not include power or fuel quantities and risks arising from our physical assets, non-derivative contracts, and forecasted transactions that we manage using derivatives; a portion of these volumes reduces those risks. It also does not include volumes of commodities under nonderivative contracts that we use to serve customers or manage our risks. Our actual net economic exposure from our generating facilities and customer supply activities is reduced by derivatives, and the exposure from our trading activities is managed and controlled through the risk measures discussed above. Therefore, the information in the table below is only an indication of that portion of our business that we manage through derivatives and serves primarily to identify the extent of our derivatives activities and the types of risks that they are intended to manage.

                Additionally, the disclosure of derivative quantities potentially could reveal commercially valuable or otherwise competitively sensitive information that could limit the effectiveness and profitability of our business activities. Therefore, in the table below, we have computed the derivative volumes for commodities by aggregating the absolute value of net positions within commodities for each year. This provides an indication of the level of derivatives activity, but it does not indicate either the direction of our position (long or short), or the overall size of our position. We believe this presentation gives an appropriate indication of the level of derivatives activity without unnecessarily revealing the size and direction of our derivatives positions.

                Finally, the volume information for commodity derivatives represents "delta equivalent" quantities, not gross notional amounts. We make use of different types of commodity derivative instruments such as forwards, futures, options, and swaps, and we believe that the delta equivalent quantity is the most relevant measure of the volume associated with these commodity derivatives. The delta-equivalent quantity represents a risk-adjusted notional quantity for each contract that takes into account the probability that an option will be exercised. Therefore, the volume information for commodity derivatives represents the delta equivalent quantity of those contracts, computed on the basis described above. For interest rate contracts and foreign currency contracts we have presented the notional amounts of such contracts in the table below.


        146


        Table of Contents

                The following tables present the volume of our derivative activities as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, shown by contractual settlement year.

        Quantities (1) Under Derivative Contracts
          
          
         As of December 31, 2010
         
          
        Contract Type (Unit)
         2011
         2012
         2013
         2014
         2015
         Thereafter
         Total
         
          
         
         (In millions)
         

        Power (MWH)

          21.2    3.8  4.2  2.3  0.2  31.7 

        Gas (mmBTU)

          175.3  90.1  80.2  64.7  24.1    434.4 

        Coal (Tons)

          4.4  2.5  0.1        7.0 

        Oil (BBL)

          0.2  0.1  0.1        0.4 

        Emission Allowances (Tons)

          1.5            1.5 

        Renewable Energy Credits (Number of credits)

          0.4  0.3  0.3  0.3  0.3  0.7  2.3 

        Interest Rate Contracts

         $639.4 $490.7 $941.8 $405.0 $460.0 $175.0 $3,111.9 

        Foreign Exchange Rate Contracts

         $48.7 $8.7 $16.8 $16.8 $15.5 $ $106.5 
          


        Quantities (1) Under Derivative Contracts
          
          
         As of December 31, 2009
         
          
        Contract Type (Unit)
         2010
         2011
         2012
         2013
         2014
         Thereafter
         Total
         
          
         
         (In millions)
         

        Power (MWH)

          32.7  1.6  3.2  3.2  0.1  0.9  41.7 

        Gas (mmBTU)

          37.3  37.4  22.1  21.0  22.7  21.3  161.8 

        Coal (Tons)

          3.9  3.9  0.2        8.0 

        Oil (BBL)

          0.3            0.3 

        Emission Allowances (Tons)

          7.2            7.2 

        Interest Rate Contracts

         $972.3 $140.6 $440.5 $58.2 $255.0 $200.0 $2,066.6 

        Foreign Exchange Rate Contracts

         $27.9 $72.4 $16.7 $16.7 $16.8 $15.5 $166.0 
          
        (1)
        Amounts in the table are only intended to provide an indication of the level of derivatives activity and should not be interpreted as a measure of any derivative position or overall economic exposure to market risk. Quantities are expressed as "delta equivalents" on an absolute value basis by contract type by year. Additionally, quantities relate only to derivatives and do not include potentially offsetting quantities associated with physical assets and nonderivative accrual contracts.

                In addition to the commodities in the tables above, we also hold derivative instruments related to weather that are insignificant relative to the overall level of our derivative activity.

        Credit-Risk Related Contingent Features

        Certain of our derivative instruments contain provisions that would require additional collateral upon a credit-related event such as an adequate assurance provision or a credit rating decrease in the senior unsecured debt of Constellation Energy. The amount of collateral we could be required to post would be determined by the fair value of contracts containing such provisions that represent a net liability, after offset for the fair value of any asset contracts with the same counterparty under master netting agreements and any other collateral already posted. This collateral amount is a component of, and is not in addition to, the total collateral we could be required to post for all contracts upon a credit rating decrease.

                The following tables present information related to these derivatives at December 31, 2010 and 2009. Based on contractual provisions, we estimate that if Constellation Energy's senior unsecured debt were downgraded, our total contingent collateral obligation for derivatives in a net liability position was $0.1 billion at December 31, 2010 and $0.2 billion as of December 31, 2009, which represents the additional collateral that we could be required to post with counterparties, including both cash collateral and letters of credit, in the event of a credit downgrade to below investment grade. These amounts are associated with net derivative liabilities totaling $0.9 billion at December 31, 2010 and $1.0 billion at December 31, 2009 after reflecting legally binding master netting agreements and collateral already posted.

                We present the gross fair value of derivatives in a net liability position that have credit-risk-related contingent features in the first column in the table below. This gross fair value amount represents only the out-of-the-money contracts containing such features that are not fully collateralized by cash on a stand-alone basis. Thus, this amount does not reflect the offsetting fair value of in-the-money contracts under legally-binding master netting agreements with the same counterparty, as shown in the second column in the table. These in-the-money contracts would offset the amount of any gross liability that could be required to be collateralized, and as a result, the actual potential collateral requirements would be based upon the net fair value of derivatives containing such features, not the gross amount. The amount of any possible contingent collateral for such contracts in the event of a downgrade would be further reduced to the extent that we have already posted collateral related to the net liability.


        147


        Table of Contents

                Because the amount of any contingent collateral obligation would be based on the net fair value of all derivative contracts under each master netting agreement, we believe that the "net fair value of derivative contracts containing this feature" as shown in the tables below is the most relevant measure of derivatives in a net liability position with credit-risk-related contingent features. This amount reflects the actual net liability upon which existing collateral postings are computed and upon which any additional contingent collateral obligation would be based.

        Credit-Risk Related Contingent Feature
         As of December 31, 2010
         
          
        Gross Fair Value
        of Derivative
        Contracts Containing
        This Feature (1)

         Offsetting Fair Value
        of In-the-Money
        Contracts Under Master
        Netting Agreements (2)

         Net Fair Value
        of Derivative
        Contracts Containing
        This Feature (3)

         Amount of
        Posted
        Collateral (4)

         Contingent
        Collateral
        Obligation (5)

         
          
         
          
         (In billions)
          
          
         
        $4.6 $(3.7)$0.9 $0.7 $0.1 
          


        Credit-Risk Related Contingent Feature
         As of December 31, 2009
         
          
        Gross Fair Value
        of Derivative
        Contracts Containing
        This Feature (1)

         Offsetting Fair Value
        of In-the-Money
        Contracts Under Master
        Netting Agreements (2)

         Net Fair Value
        of Derivative
        Contracts Containing
        This Feature (3)

         Amount of
        Posted
        Collateral (4)

         Contingent
        Collateral
        Obligation (5)

         
          
         
          
         (In billions)
          
          
         
        $8.6 $(7.6)$1.0 $0.7 $0.2 
          
        (1)
        Amount represents the gross fair value of out-of-the-money derivative contracts containing credit-risk-related contingent features that are not fully collateralized by posted cash collateral on an individual, contract-by-contract basis ignoring the effects of master netting agreements.

        (2)
        Amount represents the offsetting fair value of in-the-money derivative contracts under legally-enforceable master netting agreements with the same counterparty, which reduces the amount of any liability for which we potentially could be required to post collateral.

        (3)
        Amount represents the net fair value of out-of-the-money derivative contracts containing credit-risk related contingent features after considering the mitigating effects of offsetting positions under master netting arrangements and reflects the actual net liability upon which any potential contingent collateral obligations would be based.

        (4)
        Amount includes cash collateral posted of $0.6 million and letters of credit of $656.9 million at December 31, 2010 and cash collateral posted of $125.6 million and letters of credit of $585.2 million at December 31, 2009.

        (5)
        Amounts represent the additional collateral that we could be required to post with counterparties, including both cash collateral and letters of credit, in the event of a credit downgrade to below investment grade after giving consideration to offsetting derivative and non-derivative positions under master netting agreements.

        Concentrations of Derivative-Related Credit Risk

        We discuss our concentrations of credit risk, including derivative-related positions, inNote 1. At December 31, 2010, two counterparties, a large power cooperative and CENG, comprise total exposure concentrations of 25%.

        Fair Value Measurements

        Effective January 1, 2008, we adopted guidance related to fair value measurements. This guidance defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value, and requires certain disclosures about fair value measurements. We discuss our fair value measurements below.

                We determine the fair value of our assets and liabilities using unadjusted quoted prices in active markets (Level 1) or pricing inputs that are observable (Level 2) whenever that information is available. We use unobservable inputs (Level 3) to estimate fair value only when relevant observable inputs are not available.

                We classify assets and liabilities within the fair value hierarchy based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement of each individual asset and liability taken as a whole. We determine fair value for assets and liabilities classified as Level 1 by multiplying the market price by the quantity of the asset or liability. We primarily determine fair value measurements classified as Level 2 or Level 3 using the income valuation approach, which involves discounting estimated cash flows using assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability.

                We present all derivatives recorded at fair value net with the associated fair value cash collateral. This presentation of the net position reflects our credit exposure for our on-balance sheet positions but excludes the impact of any off-balance sheet positions and collateral. Examples of off-balance sheet positions and collateral include in-the-money accrual contracts for which the right of offset exists in the event of default and letters of credit. We discuss our letters of credit in more detail inNote 8.


        148


        Table of Contents

        Recurring Measurements

        Our assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis consist of the following (BGE's assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis are immaterial):

         
         As of December 31, 2010
         
         
         Assets
         Liabilities
         
          
         
         (In millions)
         

        Cash equivalents

         $1,545.4 $ 

        Equity securities

          43.7   

        Derivative instruments:

               
         

        Classified as derivative assets and liabilities:

               
          

        Current

          534.4  (622.3)
          

        Noncurrent

          258.9  (353.0)
          
          

        Total classified as derivative assets and liabilities

          793.3  (975.3)
         

        Classified as accounts receivable (1)

          (16.4)  
          
         

        Total derivative instruments

          776.9  (975.3)
          

        Total recurring fair value measurements

         $2,366.0 $(975.3)
          
        (1)
        Represents the unrealized fair value of exchange traded derivatives, exclusive of cash margin posted.

         
         As of December 31, 2009
         
         
         Assets
         Liabilities
         
          
         
         (In millions)
         

        Cash equivalents

         $3,065.4 $ 

        Equity securities

          46.2   

        Derivative instruments:

               
         

        Classified as derivative assets and liabilities:

               
          

        Current

          639.1  (632.6)
          

        Noncurrent

          633.9  (674.1)
          
          

        Total classified as derivative assets and liabilities

          1,273.0  (1,306.7)
         

        Classified as accounts receivable (1)

          (348.7)  
          
         

        Total derivative instruments

          924.3  (1,306.7)
          

        Total recurring fair value measurements

         $4,035.9 $(1,306.7)
          
        (1)
        Represents the unrealized fair value of exchange traded derivatives, exclusive of cash margin posted.

                Cash equivalents represent money market funds which are included in "Cash and cash equivalents" in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Equity securities primarily represent mutual fund investments which are included in "Other assets" in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Derivative instruments represent unrealized amounts related to all derivative positions, including futures, forwards, swaps, and options. We classify exchange-listed contracts as part of "Accounts Receivable" in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We classify the remainder of our derivative contracts as "Derivative assets" or "Derivative liabilities" in our Consolidated Balance Sheets.


        149


        Table of Contents


                The tables below set forth by level within the fair value hierarchy the gross components of the Company's assets and liabilities that were measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 2010 and 2009. For December 31, 2010, our net derivative assets and liabilities are disaggregated on a gross contract-by-contract basis. These gross balances are intended solely to provide information on sources of inputs to fair value and proportions of fair value involving objective versus subjective valuations and do not represent either our actual credit exposure or net economic exposure. Therefore, the objective of this table is to provide information about how each individual derivative contract is valued within the fair value hierarchy, regardless of whether a particular contract is eligible for netting against other contracts or whether it has been collateralized.

        At December 31, 2010
         Level 1
         Level 2
         Level 3
         Netting and
        Cash Collateral (1)

         Total Net
        Fair Value

         
          
         
         (In millions)
         

        Cash equivalents

         $1,545.4 $ $ $ $1,545.4 

        Equity securities

          43.7        43.7 

        Derivative assets:

                        
         

        Power contracts

            7,509.6  453.3       
         

        Gas contracts

          63.9  5,113.3  115.2       
         

        Coal contracts

            355.6  7.4       
         

        Other commodity contracts

          6.6  54.8         
         

        Interest rate contracts

          33.1  37.0         
         

        Foreign exchange contracts

            11.0         
          
         

        Total derivative assets

          103.6  13,081.3  575.9  (12,983.9) 776.9 
          

        Derivative liabilities:

                        
         

        Power contracts

            (7,758.2) (771.1)      
         

        Gas contracts

          (72.7) (4,910.3) (5.1)      
         

        Coal contracts

            (307.4) (0.9)      
         

        Other commodity contracts

          (7.1) (54.5)        
         

        Interest rate contracts

          (35.7)          
         

        Foreign exchange contracts

            (8.4)        
          

        Total derivative liabilities

          (115.5) (13,038.8) (777.1) 12,956.1  (975.3)
          
         

        Net derivative position

          (11.9) 42.5  (201.2) (27.8) (198.4)
          

        Total

         $1,577.2 $42.5 $(201.2)$(27.8)$1,390.7 
          
        (1)
        We present our derivative assets and liabilities in our Consolidated Balance Sheets on a net basis. We net derivative assets and liabilities, including cash collateral, when a legally enforceable master netting agreement exists between us and the counterparty to a derivative contract. At December 31, 2010, we included $28.4 million of cash collateral held and $0.6 million of cash collateral posted (excluding margin posted on exchange traded derivatives) in netting amounts in the above table.

        At December 31, 2009
         Level 1
         Level 2
         Level 3
         Netting and
        Cash Collateral (1)

         Total Net
        Fair Value

         
          
         
         (In millions)
         

        Cash equivalents

         $3,065.4 $ $ $ $3,065.4 

        Equity securities—mutual funds

          46.2        46.2 

        Derivative assets

          80.7  19,393.9  803.3  (19,353.6) 924.3 

        Derivative liabilities

          (79.0) (19,519.5) (1,094.8) 19,386.6  (1,306.7)
          
         

        Net derivative position

          1.7  (125.6) (291.5) 33.0  (382.4)
          

        Total

         $3,113.3 $(125.6)$(291.5)$33.0 $2,729.2 
          
        (1)
        We present our derivative assets and liabilities in our Consolidated Balance Sheets on a net basis. We net derivative assets and liabilities, including cash collateral, when a legally enforceable master netting agreement exists between us and the counterparty to a derivative contract. At December 31, 2009, we included $92.6 million of cash collateral held and $125.6 million of cash collateral posted (excluding margin posted on exchange traded derivatives) in netting amounts in the above table.

                The factors that cause changes in the gross components of the derivative amounts in the tables above are unrelated to the existence or level of actual market or credit risk from our operations. We describe the primary factors that change the gross components below.

                We prepared this table by separating each individual derivative contract that is in the money from each contract that


        150


        Table of Contents

        is out of the money. We also did not reflect master netting agreements and collateral for our derivatives. As a result, the gross "asset" and "liability" amounts in each of the three fair value levels far exceed our actual economic exposure to commodity price risk and credit risk. Our actual economic exposure consists of the net derivative position combined with our nonderivative accrual contracts, such as those for load-serving, and our physical assets, such as our power plants. Our actual credit risk exposure is reflected in the net derivative asset and derivative liability amounts shown in the Total Net Fair Value column.

                Increases and decreases in the gross components presented in each of the levels in this table also do not indicate changes in the level of derivative activities. Rather, the primary factors affecting the gross amounts are commodity prices and the total number of contracts. If commodity prices change, the gross amounts could increase, even if the level of contracts stays the same, because separate presentation is required for contracts that are in the money from those that are out of the money. As a result, even fully hedged positions could exhibit increases in the gross amounts if prices change. Additionally, if the number of contracts increases, the gross amounts also could increase. Thus, the execution of new contracts to reduce economic risk could actually increase the gross amounts in the table because of the required separation of contracts discussed above.

                Cash equivalents consist of exchange-traded money market funds, which are valued by multiplying unadjusted quoted prices in active markets by the quantity of the asset and are classified within Level 1.

                Equity securities consist of mutual funds, which are valued by multiplying unadjusted quoted prices in active markets by the quantity of the asset and are classified within Level 1.

                Derivative instruments include exchange-traded and bilateral contracts. Exchange-traded derivative contracts include futures and options. Bilateral derivative contracts include swaps, forwards, options and structured transactions. We have classified derivative contracts within the fair value hierarchy as follows:

          Exchange-traded derivative contracts valued by multiplying unadjusted quoted prices in active markets by the quantity of the asset or liability are classified within Level 1.
          Exchange-traded derivative contracts valued using pricing inputs based upon market quotes or market transactions are classified within Level 2. These contracts generally trade in less active markets (i.e., for certain contracts the exchange sets the closing price, which may not be reflective of an actual trade).
          Bilateral derivative contracts where observable inputs are available for substantially the full term and value of the asset or liability are classified within Level 2.
          Bilateral derivative contracts with a lower availability of pricing information are classified in Level 3. In addition, structured transactions, such as certain options, may require us to use internally developed model inputs, which might not be observable in or corroborated by the market, to determine fair value. When such unobservable inputs have more than an insignificant impact on the measurement of fair value, we classify the instrument within Level 3.

                During 2010, there were no significant transfers of derivatives between Level 1 and Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

                We utilize models based upon the income approach to measure the fair value of derivative contracts classified as Level 2 or 3. Generally, we use similar models to value similar instruments. In order to determine fair value, we utilize various inputs and factors including market data and assumptions that market participants would use in pricing assets or liabilities as well as assumptions about the risks inherent in the inputs to the valuation technique. The inputs and factors include:

          forward commodity prices,
          price volatility,
          volumes,
          location,
          interest rates,
          credit quality of counterparties and Constellation Energy, and
          credit enhancements.

                The primary input to our valuation models is the forward commodity curve for the respective instrument. Forward commodity curves are derived from published exchange transaction prices, executed bilateral transactions, broker quotes, and other observable or public data sources. The relevant forward commodity curve used to value each of our derivatives will depend on a number of factors including commodity type, location, and expected delivery period. Price volatility would vary by commodity and location. When appropriate, we discount future cash flows using risk free interest rates with adjustments to reflect the credit quality of each counterparty for assets and our own credit quality for liabilities.

                We also record valuation adjustments to reflect uncertainty associated with certain estimates inherent in the determination of the fair value of derivative assets and liabilities. The effect of these uncertainties is not incorporated in market price information of other market-based estimates used to determine fair value of our mark-to-market energy contracts.

                We describe below the main types of valuation adjustments we record and the process for establishing each. Generally, increases in valuation adjustments reduce our earnings, and decreases in valuation adjustments increase our earnings. However, all or a portion of the effect on earnings of changes in valuation adjustments may be offset by changes in the value of the underlying positions.

          Close-out adjustment—represents the estimated cost to close out or sell to a third party open mark-to-market positions. This valuation adjustment has the effect of valuing "long" positions (the purchase of a commodity) at the bid price and "short" positions (the sale of a commodity) at the offer price. We compute this adjustment using a market-based estimate of the bid/offer spread for each commodity and option price and the absolute quantity of our net open positions for each year. The level of total close-out valuation adjustments increases as we have larger unhedged positions, bid-offer


        151


        Table of Contents

            spreads increase, or market information is not available, and it decreases as we reduce our unhedged positions, bid-offer spreads decrease, or market information becomes available.

          Unobservable input valuation adjustment—this adjustment is necessary when we determine fair value for derivative positions using internally developed models that use unobservable inputs due to the absence of observable market information. Unobservable inputs to fair value may arise due to a number of factors, including but not limited to, the term of the transaction, contract optionality, delivery location, or product type. In the absence of observable market information that supports the model inputs, there is a presumption that the transaction price is equal to the market value of the contract when we transact in our principal market and thus we recalibrate our estimate of fair value to equal the transaction price. Therefore we do not recognize a gain or loss at contract inception on these transactions. We will recognize such gains or losses in earnings as we realize cash flows under the contract or when observable market data becomes available.
          Credit-spread adjustment—for risk management purposes, we compute the value of our derivative assets and liabilities using a risk-free discount rate. In order to compute fair value for financial reporting purposes, we adjust the value of our derivative assets to reflect the credit-worthiness of each counterparty based upon either published credit ratings or equivalent internal credit ratings and associated default probability percentages. We compute this adjustment by applying a default probability percentage to our outstanding credit exposure, net of collateral, for each counterparty. The level of this adjustment increases as our credit exposure to counterparties increases, the maturity terms of our transactions increase, or the credit ratings of our counterparties deteriorate, and it decreases when our credit exposure to counterparties decreases, the maturity terms of our transactions decrease, or the credit ratings of our counterparties improve. As part of our evaluation, we assess whether the counterparties' published credit ratings are reflective of current market conditions. We review available observable data including bond prices and yields and credit default swaps to the extent it is available. We also consider the credit risk measurement implied by that data in determining our default probability percentages, and we evaluate its reliability based upon market liquidity, comparability, and other factors. We also use a credit-spread adjustment in order to reflect our own credit risk in determining the fair value of our derivative liabilities.

                We regularly evaluate and validate the inputs we use to estimate fair value by a number of methods, consisting of various market price verification procedures, including the use of pricing services and multiple broker quotes to support the market price of the various commodities in which we transact, as well as review and verification of models and changes to those models. These activities are undertaken by individuals that are independent of those responsible for estimating fair value.

                The Company's assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement requires judgment and may affect the classification of assets and liabilities within the fair value hierarchy. Because of the long-term nature of certain assets and liabilities measured at fair value as well as differences in the availability of market prices and market liquidity over their terms, inputs for some assets and liabilities may fall into any one of the three levels in the fair value hierarchy or some combination thereof. Thus, even though we are required to classify these assets and liabilities in the lowest level in the hierarchy for which inputs are significant to the fair value measurement, a portion of that measurement may be determined using inputs from a higher level in the hierarchy.

                The following table sets forth a reconciliation of changes in Level 3 fair value measurements, which predominantly relate to power contracts:

         
         Year Ended
        December 31,

         
         
         2010
         2009
         
          
         
         (In millions)
         

        Balance at beginning of period

         $(291.5)$37.0 

        Realized and unrealized (losses) gains:

               
         

        Recorded in income

          157.0  (297.0)
         

        Recorded in other comprehensive income

          95.2  201.6 

        Purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements

          (69.6) (140.8)

        Transfers into Level 3 (1)

          73.6    

        Transfers out of Level 3 (1)

          (165.9)   

        Net transfers into and out of Level 3

          (92.3) (92.3)
          

        Balance at end of year

         $(201.2)$(291.5)
          

        Change in unrealized gains recorded in income relating to derivatives still held at end of period

         $189.5 $(27.8)
          
        (1)
        Effective January 1, 2010, we are required to present separately the amounts transferred into Level 3 from the amounts transferred out of Level 3. For purposes of this reconciliation, we assumed transfers into and out of Level 3 occurred on the last day of the quarter.

                Realized and unrealized gains (losses) are included primarily in "Nonregulated revenues" for our derivative contracts that are marked-to-market in our Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss) and are included in "Accumulated other comprehensive loss" for our derivative contracts designated as cash-flow hedges in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We discuss the income statement classification for realized gains and losses related to cash-flow hedges for our various hedging relationships inNote 1.

                Realized and unrealized gains (losses) include the realization of derivative contracts through maturity. This includes the fair value, as of the beginning of each quarterly reporting period, of contracts that matured during each quarterly reporting period. Purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements represent cash paid or


        152


        Table of Contents

        received for option premiums, and the acquisition or termination of derivative contracts prior to maturity. Transfers into Level 3 represent existing assets or liabilities that were previously categorized at a higher level for which the inputs to the model became unobservable. Transfers out of Level 3 represent assets and liabilities that were previously classified as Level 3 for which the inputs became observable based on the criteria discussed previously for classification in either Level 1 or Level 2. Because the depth and liquidity of the power markets varies substantially between regions and time periods, the availability of observable inputs for substantially the full term and value of our bilateral derivative contracts changes frequently. As a result, we also expect derivatives balances to transfer into and out of Level 3 frequently based on changes in the observable data available as of the end of the period.

        Nonrecurring Measurements

        The table below sets forth by level within the fair value hierarchy our assets and liabilities that were measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis during the year ended December 31, 2010:

         
         Fair Value at
        September 30,
        2010

         Fair Value at
        December 31,
        2010

         Level 3
         Losses for the
        year ended
        December 31,
        2010

         
          
         
         (In millions)
         

        Investment in CENG

         $2,970.4 $N/A $2,970.4 $2,275.0 

        Other investments:

                     
         

        UNE

            N/A    143.4 
         

        Qualifying facilities—coal

          36.7  N/A  36.7  50.0 
         

        Qualifying facilities—hydroelectric

          N/A  14.8  14.8  8.4 
          
         

        Total other investments

          36.7  14.8  51.5  201.8 
          

        Total

         $3,007.1 $14.8 $3,021.9 $2,476.8 
          

                During the quarter ended September 30, 2010, we recorded other-than-temporary impairment charges of $2,468.4 million on our equity method investments including CENG, UNE, and three coal-fired generating facilities located in California. Additionally, during the quarter ended December 31, 2010, we recorded an other-than-temporary impairment charge of $8.4 million on one of our equity investments that own a hydroelectric generating facility in California. These fair value measurements included significant unobservable inputs, and, as such, the entire amounts of the measurements were classified as Level 3. We discuss these impairment charges, including the inputs and valuation techniques used to estimate the fair value of these equity method investments, in more detail inNote 2.

                There were no nonrecurring measurements in 2009.

        Fair Value of Financial Instruments

        TheWe show the carrying amounts and fair value of a financial instrument represents the amount at which the instrument could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties, other than in a forced sale or liquidation. Significant differences can occur between the fair value and carrying amountvalues of financial instruments that are recorded at historical amounts.included in our Consolidated Balance Sheets in the following table:

        At December 31,
         2010
         2009
         
          
         
         Carrying
        Amount

         Fair
        Value

         Carrying
        Amount

         Fair
        Value

         
          
         
         (In millions)
         

        Investments and other assets—Constellation Energy

         $248.7 $249.2 $167.6 $166.0 

        Fixed-rate long-term debt:

                     
         

        Constellation Energy (including BGE)

          4,229.3  4,518.4  4,225.0  4,433.1 
         

        BGE

          2,143.6  2,301.8  2,200.1  2,280.5 

        Variable-rate long-term debt:

                     
         

        Constellation Energy (including BGE)

          528.7  528.7  649.9  649.9 
         

        BGE

                 
          

                We use the following methods and assumptions for estimating fair value disclosures for financial instruments:

          cash and cash equivalents, net accounts receivable, other current assets, certain current liabilities, short-term borrowings, current portion of long-term debt, and certain deferred credits and other liabilities: because of their short-term nature, the amounts reported in our Consolidated Balance Sheets approximate fair value,
          investments and other assets: the fair value is based on quoted market prices where available, and
          long-term debt: the fair value is based on quoted market prices where available or by discounting remaining cash flows at current market rates.

                We show the carrying amounts and fair values
        153


          Table of financial instruments included in our Consolidated Balance Sheets in the following table:Contents

          At December 31,
           2007
           2006

           
           Carrying
          Amount

           Fair
          Value

           Carrying
          Amount

           Fair
          Value


           
           (In millions)
          Investments and other assets—Constellation Energy $1,634.2 $1,634.5 $1,468.8 $1,469.3
          Fixed-rate long-term debt:            
           Constellation Energy  4,244.3  4,307.5  4,383.8  4,513.8
           BGE  2,215.1  2,178.6  1,716.7  1,712.6
          Variable-rate long-term debt:            
           Constellation Energy  801.6  801.6  723.2  723.2
           BGE        

          14Stock-Based Compensation

          Under our long-term incentive plans, we grant stock options, performance and service-based restricted stock, performance- and service-based units, stock units, deferred cash and equity to officers, key employees, and members of the Board of Directors. In May 2007,2010, shareholders approved Constellation Energy's Amended and Restated 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan, under which we can grant up to a totalincluding an increase in the number of 9,000,000 shares.shares available for issuance by 9,000,000. Any shares covered by an outstanding award under any of our long-term incentive plans that are forfeited or cancelled, expire or are settled in cash will become available for issuance under the Amended and Restated 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan. At December 31, 2007,2010, there were 9,244,96912,818,160 shares available for issuance under the 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan. At December 31, 2007,2010, we had stock options, restricted stock, performance unitunits and equity grants outstanding as discussed below. We may issue new shares, reuse forfeited shares, or buy shares in the market in order to deliver shares to employees for our equity grants. BGE officers and key employees participate in our stock-based compensation plans. The expense recognized by BGE in 2007, 2006,2010, 2009, and 20052008 was not material to BGE's financial results.

          Non-Qualified Stock Options

          Options are granted with an exercise price equal to the market value of the common stock at the date of grant, become vested over a period up to three years (expense recognized in tranches), and expire ten years from the date of grant.

                  The fair value of our stock-based awards was estimated as of the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model based on the following weighted- average assumptions:

           
           2007
           2006
           2005
           

           
          Risk-free interest rate 4.69% 4.10%
          Expected life (in years) 4.0  2.9* 
          Expected market price volatility factor 20.3% 21.3%
          Expected dividend yield 2.5% 3.0%

          * Includes 2.0 million fully vested options granted in December 2005, which would have been cancelled upon a change in control if our proposed merger with FPL Group would have been consummated and for which an expected life of one year was used to value the grant. Excluding this grant, we used a weighted-average expected life assumption of 5 years for 2005 grants.

           
           2010
           2009
           2008
           
            

          Risk-free interest rate

            1.87% 1.95% 2.57%

          Expected life (in years)

            4.0  4.0  4.0 

          Expected market price volatility factor

            32.5% 37.8% 25.8%

          Expected dividend yield

            2.74% 4.83% 1.85%

                  During 2006, no stock options were granted to employees in anticipation of the proposed merger with FPL Group, which was terminated in October 2006. We discuss the termination of the merger in more detail inNote 15.

                  We use the historical data related to stock option exercises in order to estimate the expected life of our stock options. We also use historical data in order to estimate the volatility factor (measured on a daily basis) for a period equal to the duration of the expected life of option awards.awards, information on the volatility of an identified group of peer companies, and implied volatilities for certain publicly traded options in Constellation Energy common stock in order to estimate the volatility factor. We believe that the use of historicalthis data to estimate these factors provides a reasonable basis for our assumptions. The risk-free interest rate for the periods within the expected life of the option is based on the U.S Treasury yield curve in effect and the expected dividend yield is based on our current estimate for dividend payout at the time of grant. We disclose the pro-forma effect on net income and earnings per share for the periods prior to adoption of SFAS No. 123R inNote 1.

                  Summarized information for our stock option grants is as follows:

           
           2007
           2006
           2005
           
           
           
           Shares
           Weighted-
          Average
          Exercise Price

           Shares
          ��Weighted-
          Average
          Exercise Price

           Shares
           Weighted-
          Average
          Exercise Price


           
           (Shares in thousands)
          Outstanding, beginning of year 6,051 $47.23 7,172 $45.24 7,365 $31.62
           Granted with exercise prices at fair market value 1,759  76.22    3,840  54.94
           Exercised (1,411) 41.91 (1,050) 33.77 (3,935) 29.32
           Forfeited/expired (254) 67.85 (71) 45.22 (98) 42.19

          Outstanding, end of year 6,145 $55.90 6,051 $47.23 7,172 $45.24

          Exercisable, end of year 4,043 $48.51 4,401 $46.94 4,022 $45.31

           Weighted- average fair value per share of options granted with exercise prices at fair market value   $13.76   $   $7.13

           
           2010
           2009
           2008
           
           
             
           
           Shares
           Weighted-
          Average
          Exercise Price

           Shares
           Weighted-
          Average
          Exercise Price

           Shares
           Weighted-
          Average
          Exercise Price

           
            
           
           (Shares in thousands)
           

          Outstanding, beginning of year

            8,146 $44.36  6,058 $59.99  6,145 $55.90 
           

          Granted with exercise prices at fair market value

            1,468  35.07  3,511  20.14  1,434  93.79 
           

          Exercised

            (235) 23.53  (83) 31.07  (375) 47.02 
           

          Forfeited/expired

            (309) 43.41  (1,340) 52.41  (1,146) 84.59 
            

          Outstanding, end of year

            9,070 $43.43  8,146 $44.36  6,058 $59.99 
            

          Exercisable, end of year

            5,316 $52.65  4,114 $55.81  4,665 $52.13 
            
           

          Weighted-average fair value per share of options granted with exercise prices at fair market value

              $7.60    $4.24    $18.75 
            


          154


          Table of Contents

                  The following table summarizes additional information about stock options during 2007, 20062010, 2009 and 2005:2008:

           
           2007
           2006
           2005

           
           (In millions)

          Stock Option Expense Recognized $15.1 $6.7 $14.4
          Stock Options Exercised:         
           Cash Received for Exercise Price  43.4  35.5  35.3
           Intrinsic Value Realized by Employee  67.6  27.6  109.8
           Realized Tax Benefit  26.7  10.9  43.4
          Fair Value of Shares that Vested  82.7  82.6  232.0

           
           2010
           2009
           2008
           
            
           
           (In millions)
           

          Stock Option Expense Recognized

           $9.9 $14.2 $11.0 

          Stock Options Exercised:

                    
           

          Cash Received for Exercise Price

            5.5  2.6  20.2 
           

          Intrinsic Value Realized by Employee

            2.7  0.2  14.1 
           

          Realized Tax Benefit

            1.1  0.1  5.7 

          Fair Value of Options that Vested

            54.4  11.0  98.3 

                  As of December 31, 2007,2010, we had $11.5$3.8 million of unrecognized compensation cost related to the unvested portion of outstanding stock option awards, of which $8.1$2.8 million is expected to be recognized during 2008.2011.

                  The following table summarizes additional information about stock options outstanding at December 31, 20072010 (stock options in thousands):

           
           Outstanding
           Exercisable
            
           
           Weighted-
          Average
          Remaining
          Contractual
          Life

          Range of
          Exercise
          Prices

           Stock
          Options

           Aggregate
          Intrinsic
          Value

           Stock
          Options

           Aggregate
          Intrinsic
          Value


           
            
           (In millions)
            
           (In millions)
           (In years)
          $20.00 – $40.00 1,435 $97.7 1,435 $97.7 5.2
          $40.00 – $60.00 3,128  149.9 2,608  123.0 5.6
          $60.00 – $80.00 1,537  41.9    9.1
          $80.00 – $100.00 45  0.6    9.5
             
            
             6,145 $290.1 4,043 $220.7  
             
            

           
           Outstanding Exercisable  
           
           
           Weighted-
          Average
          Remaining
          Contractual
          Life

           
          Range of
          Exercise
          Prices

           Stock
          Options

           Aggregate
          Intrinsic
          Value

           Stock
          Options

           Aggregate
          Intrinsic
          Value

           
            
           
            
           (In millions)
            
           (In millions)
           (In years)
           
           $  0 – $  20  2,896 $31.9  871 $9.6  8.2 
           $20 – $  40  2,422    930    6.8 
           $40 – $  60  2,245    2,245    4.7 
           $60 – $  80  762    762    6.2 
           $80 – $100  745    508    7.1 
            
              9,070 $31.9  5,316 $9.6    
                  

          Restricted Stock Awards

          In addition to stock options, we issue service-based common stock based on meeting certain service goals. This stockthat vests to participants at various timesover periods ranging from one to five years if the service goals are met. In accordanceand fully vested common stock units with SFAS No. 123R, wesales restrictions ranging from approximately 10 months to 5 years. We account for our service-basedthese awards as equity awards, whereby we recognize the value of the market price of the underlying stock on the date of grant toas compensation expense immediately for fully vested common stock units with sales restrictions or over the service period either ratably or in tranches (depending if the award has cliff or graded vesting). for service-based common stock.

                  We recorded compensation expense related to our restricted stock awards of $35.8$9.5 million in 2007, $24.52010, $16.7 million in 2006,2009, and $28.2$35.3 million in 2005.2008. The tax benefits received associated with our restricted awards were $17.6$10.0 million in 2007, $10.92010, $6.7 million in 2006,2009, and $7.5$20.1 million in 2005.2008.

                  Summarized share information for our restricted stock awards is as follows:

           
           2007
           2006
           2005
           

           
           
           (Shares in thousands)
           
          Outstanding, beginning of year  1,207  1,272  1,223 
           Granted  710  511  485 
           Released to participants  (552) (502) (359)
           Cancelled  (43) (74) (77)

           
          Outstanding, end of year  1,322  1,207  1,272 

           
          Weighted-average fair value of restricted stock granted (per share) $75.29 $58.68 $51.23 

           
          Total fair value of shares for which restriction has lapsed (in millions) $44.5 $27.6 $19.0 

           

           
           2010
           2009
           2008
           
            
           
           (Shares in thousands)
           

          Outstanding, beginning of year

            1,017  1,033  1,322 
           

          Granted

            832  866  365 
           

          Released to participants

            (713) (701) (536)
           

          Canceled

            (56) (181) (118)
            

          Outstanding, end of year

            1,080  1,017  1,033 
            

          Weighted-average fair value of restricted stock granted (per share)

           $34.83 $19.83 $94.62 
            

          Total fair value of shares for which restriction has lapsed (in millions)

           $24.9 $16.5 $49.7 
            

                  As of December 31, 2007,2010, we had $26.8$8.6 million of unrecognized compensation cost related to the unvested portion of outstanding restricted stock awards expected to be recognized within a 26-month43-month period. At December 31, 2007,2010, we have recorded in "Common shareholders' equity" approximately $42.3$18.6 million and approximately $31.7$37.4 million at December 31, 20062009 for the unvested portion of service-based restricted stock granted from 20032008 until 20072010 to officers and other employees that is contingently redeemable in cash upon a change in control.

          Performance-Based Units

          In accordance with SFAS No. 123R, weWe recognize compensation expense ratably for our performance-based awards, which are classified as liability awards, for which the fair value of the award is remeasured at each reporting period. Each unit is equivalent to $1 in value and cliff vests at the end of a three-year service and performance period. The level of payout is based on the achievement of certain performance goals at the end of the three-year period and will be settled in cash. We recordedrecognized compensation expense of $17.6$6.2 million in 2007, $24.02010, compensation expense of $1.5 million in 2006,2009, and $7.0a reduction of expense of $3.2 million in 20052008 for these awards. During the 12 months ended December 31, 2007,2010, no performance-based unit awards vested. During the 12 months ended December 31, 2009, no performance-based unit awards vested. During the 12 months ended December 31, 2008, our 20042005 performance-based unit award vested and we paid $19.7$24.2 million in cash to settle the award. As of December 31, 20072010, we had $17.2$11.8 million of unrecognized compensation cost related to the unvested portion of outstanding performance-based unit awards expected to be recognized within a 26-month period.

          Equity-Based Grants

          We recorded compensation expense of $0.8 million in 2010, $0.9 million in 2007, $0.62009, and $0.9 million in 2006, and $0.5 million in 20052008 related to equity-based grants to members of the Board of Directors.


          155


          Table of Contents

          15Merger and Acquisitions

          Subsequent Event—Asset AcquisitionCPower

          In February 2008,October 2010, we acquired 100% ownership of CPower, an energy management and demand response provider, for $77.8 million in cash, all of which was paid at closing. CPower designs and manages programs that allow its customers to reduce electricity demand at times of peak usage. We have included CPower's results of operations in our consolidated financial statements as part of our NewEnergy business segment since the Hillabeedate of acquisition.

                  We recorded the major classes of assets acquired and liabilities assumed as follows:

          At October 11, 2010
            
           
            
           
           (In millions)
           

          Cash and cash equivalents

           $4.9 

          Other current assets

            10.8 

          Goodwill (1)

            51.5 

          Acquired intangible assets (2)

            13.4 

          Other assets

            12.0 
            

          Total assets acquired

            92.6 
            

          Total liabilities

            (14.8)
            

          Net assets acquired

           $77.8 
            
          (1)
          $3.6 million is deductible for tax purposes.

          (2)
          The weighted average amortization for these intangibles is approximately 2 years.

                  The pro-forma impact of this acquisition would not have been material to our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.

          Boston Generating

          In January 2011, we completed the acquisition of Boston Generating's 2,950 MW fleet of generating plants for approximately $1.1 billion, subject to a working capital true-up adjustment. The fleet acquired includes the following four natural gas power plants and one fuel oil plant located in the Boston, Massachusetts area:

            Mystic 7—574 MW,
            Mystic 8 and 9—1,580 MW,
            Fore River—787 MW, and
            Mystic Jet, a fuel oil plant—9 MW.

                  Upon signing an asset purchase agreement in August 2010, we deposited $50.0 million into an escrow account and recorded this amount as "Restricted cash—current" on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. This deposit plus interest was applied toward the purchase price at closing in January 2011.

                  We will account for this acquisition as a business combination, and, beginning in January 2011, we will include these assets and the related results of operations in our Generation business segment.

          Texas Combined Cycle Generation Facilities

          In May 2010, we acquired 100% ownership of the 550 MW Colorado Bend Energy Center a partially completed 774and the 550 MW Quail Run Energy Center natural gas fired combined-cycle powercombined cycle generation facility locatedfacilities in AlabamaTexas for $155.5 million.$372.9 million, all of which was paid in cash at closing. We plan to completeinclude these facilities as part of our Generation business and have included their results of operations in our consolidated financial statements since the constructiondate of acquisition.

                  We recorded the major classes of assets acquired and liabilities assumed as follows:

          At May 17, 2010
            
           
            
           
           (In millions)
           

          Current assets

           $7.1 

          Property, plant and equipment

            368.6 
            

          Total assets acquired

            375.7 
            

          Current liabilities

            (2.8)
            

          Net assets acquired

           $372.9 
            

                  The pro-forma impact of this facilityacquisition would not have been material to our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and expect it2008.

          Criterion Wind Project

          In April 2010, we acquired 100% ownership of a 70 MW Criterion wind project to be readyconstructed in Garrett County, Maryland. In December 2010, we placed this facility in commercial operation. This wind energy project was developed, constructed, and is owned by our Generation business.

                  The pro-forma impact of all of the 2010 acquisitions, collectively, would not have been material to our results of operations for commercial operation in early 2010.the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.

          CornerstoneCLT Energy Services Group

          On July 1, 2007,2009, we acquired Cornerstone100% ownership of CLT Energy Inc (CEI).Services Group, doing business as CLT Efficient Technologies Group (CLT) for $21.9 million, of which $20.8 million was paid in cash at closing. We include CEI,CLT as part of our retail competitive supply operation, in our merchant energyNewEnergy business segment and have included its results of operations in our consolidated financial statements since the date of acquisition. CEICLT is an energy services company that provides natural gas supplyenergy performance contracting and related services to commercial, industrial and institutional customers across the central United States. CEI is expected to add approximately 100 billion cubic feetenergy efficiency engineering services.


          156


          Table of natural gas to our annual volumes served.

                  We acquired 100% ownership for $108.3 million, which was paid in cash. As part of the purchase, we acquired $7.3 million in cash.

                  The total consideration for accounting purposes, consisting of cash and other noncash consideration, including the fair value of certain preexisting contracts with CEI, was equal to $137.6 million.Contents

                  Our final purchase price allocation for the net assets acquiredrelated to CLT is as follows:

          At July 1, 2007
            
           

           
           
           (In millions)
           
          Cash $7.3 
          Other Current Assets  89.6 

           
          Total Current Assets  96.9 
          Goodwill (1)  103.4 
          Net Property, Plant and Equipment  0.5 
          Other Assets  6.7 

           
          Total Assets Acquired  207.5 

           
          Current Liabilities  (66.3)
          Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities  (3.6)

           
          Total Liabilities  (69.9)

           
          Net Assets Acquired $137.6 

           

          At July 1, 2009
            
           
            
           
           (In millions)
           

          Current assets

           $5.7 

          Goodwill (1)

            18.6 

          Other assets

            2.3 
            

          Total assets acquired

            26.6 
            

          Current liabilities

            (4.7)
            

          Net assets acquired

           $21.9 
            
          1) Approximately $99 million is(1)
          100% deductible for tax purposes.

                  The pro-forma impact of the CEICLT acquisition would not have been material to our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2007, 20062009, 2008, and 2005.2007.

          Acquisitions
          157


          Table of Working Interests in Gas Producing Fields

          In 2007, we acquired working interests of 41% and 55% in two gas and oil producing properties in Oklahoma for $208.9 million, subject to closing adjustments. We purchased leases, producing wells, inventory, and related equipment. We have included the results of operations from these properties in our merchant energy business segment since the date of acquisition.

                  Our purchase price was allocated to the net assets acquired as follows:

          At March 23, 2007
            

           
           (In millions)
          Property, Plant and Equipment   
           Inventory $0.2
           Unproved property  28.8
           Proved property  179.9

          Net Assets Acquired $208.9

                  The pro-forma impact of the acquisition of these working interests would not have been material to our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005.

                  In the first quarter of 2006, we acquired working interests in gas and oil producing properties for approximately $100 million in cash. We purchased leases, producing wells, and related equipment. We have included the results of operations in our merchant energy business segment since the date of acquisition.

          Termination of Merger Agreement with FPL Group, Inc.Contents

          On October 24, 2006, 16 Related Party Transactions

          Constellation Energy

          CENG

          On November 6, 2009, upon the sale of a membership interest in CENG, our nuclear generation and FPL Group agreedoperation business, to terminateEDF, we deconsolidated CENG and began accounting for our 50.01% membership interest in CENG as an equity method investment. On November 3, 2010, we closed on a comprehensive agreement with EDF that restructures the Agreement and Plan of Merger the parties had entered into on December 18, 2005.relationship between our two companies.

                  In connection with the terminationclosing of the merger2009 transaction with EDF, we entered into a power purchase agreement (PPA) with CENG with an initial fair value of $0.8 billion under which we will purchase between 85-90% of the output of CENG's nuclear plants that is not sold to third parties under pre-existing PPAs over the five year term of the PPA. As part of the 2010 comprehensive agreement with EDF, the PPA was modified to be unit contingent for prospective trades beginning in November 2010 through the end of its term in 2014. In addition, beginning on January 1, 2015 and continuing to the end of the life of the respective plants, we will purchase 50.01% of the output of CENG's nuclear plants, and EDF will purchase 49.99% of that output.

                  In addition to the PPA, in 2009 we entered into a power services agency agreement (PSA) and an administrative service agreement (ASA). The PSA is a five-year agreement under which we will provide scheduling, asset management and billing services to CENG and recognize average annual revenue of approximately $16 million. The ASA was initially a one year agreement that was renewable annually. Under the ASA, we provided administrative support services to CENG for a fee of approximately $66 million for 2010. The fees for administrative support services are subject to change in future years based on the level of services provided. The fee for 2011 will be approximately $48 million. The charges under this agreement are intended to represent the actual cost of the services provided to CENG by us. As part of the 2010 comprehensive agreement with EDF, the ASA was extended through 2017 to include a consumption-based pricing structure in addition to the fixed-price structure.

                  The impact of transactions under these agreements is summarized below:

          Agreement
           Amount
          Recognized
          in Earnings
          for the
          Year
          Ended
          December 31,
          2010

           Amount
          Recognized
          in Earnings
          for the
          Period from
          November 6,
          2009 through
          December 31,
          2009

           Income
          Statement
          Classification

           Accounts
          Receivable/
          (Accounts
          Payable) at
          December 31,
          2010

           
            
          (In millions)
           

          PPA

           $900.8 $122.5 Fuel and purchased energy expenses $(47.6)

          PSA

            (16.1) (2.7)Nonregulated revenues   

          ASA

            (66.0) (10.0)Operating expenses  5.5 

          UNE

          We sold our interest in UNE during 2010. We discuss this transaction in more detail inNote 4.

          CEP

          On March 31, 2008, our NewEnergy business sold its working interest in 83 oil and natural gas producing wells in Oklahoma to CEP, an equity method investment of Constellation Energy, acquired certain development rights from FPL Group relating tofor total proceeds of approximately $53 million. Our NewEnergy business recognized a wind power project$14.3 million gain, net of the minority interest gain of $0.7 million on the sale and exclusive of our 28.5% ownership interest in Western Maryland. During 2007, we wrote-offCEP. This gain is recorded in "Gains on Sales of Assets" in our investment in these development rights. SeeNote 2 for further detail.

                  We incurred merger costs during the year ended December 31, 2006 totaling $18.3 million pre-tax. Our total pre-tax merger-related costs were $35.3 million.


          16Related Party Transactions—BGEConsolidated Statements of Income (Loss).

          BGE—Income Statement

          BGE is obligated to provide market-based standard offer service to all of its electric customers for varying periods. Bidding to supply BGE's market-based standard offer service to electric customers will occur from time to time through a competitive bidding process approved by the Maryland PSC.

                  Our wholesale marketing, risk management, and trading operation supplied a substantial portion of BGE's market-based standard offer service obligation to residential electric customers through May 31, 2007, andNewEnergy business will supply a portion of BGE's market-based standard offer service obligations for allobligation to electric customers from June 1, 2007 through May 31, 2009.2013.

                  The cost of BGE's purchased energy from nonregulated subsidiaries of Constellation Energy to meet its standard offer service obligation was as follows:

          Year Ended December 31,
           2007
           2006
           2005

           
           (In millions)
          Electricity purchased for resale expenses $1,139.6 $1,062.0 $805.9

          Year Ended December 31,
           2010
           2009
           2008
           
            
           
           (In millions)
           

          Electricity purchased for resale expenses

           $428.0 $623.5 $802.0 
            

                  In addition, Constellation Energy charges BGE for the costs of certain corporate functions. CertainThese costs are directly assigned to BGE. We allocate other corporate functioncomprised of direct charges as well as costs that are allocated based on a total percentage of expected use by BGE. We believe this method of allocation is reasonable and approximates the cost BGE would have incurred as an unaffiliated entity. Under the Maryland PSC's October 30, 2009 order approving the transaction with EDF, we are limited to allocating no more than 31% of these costs to BGE.

                  The following table presents all of the costs Constellation Energy charged to BGE in each period.period, both directly-charged and allocated.

          Year ended December 31,
           2007
           2006
           2005

           
           (In millions)
          Charges to BGE $160.8 $148.8 $130.3

          Year ended December 31,
           2010
           2009
           2008
           
            
           
           (In millions)
           

          Charges to BGE

           $184.8 $164.7 $153.6 
            

                  Other nonregulated affiliates of BGE also charge BGE for the costs of certain services provided.


          158


          Table of Contents

          BGE—Balance Sheet

          Through January 7, 2010, BGE participatesparticipated in a cash pool under a Master Demand Note agreement with Constellation Energy. Under this arrangement, participating subsidiaries may invest in or borrow from the pool at market interest rates. Constellation Energy administers the pool and invests excess cash in short-term investments or issues commercial paper to manage consolidated cash requirements. Under this arrangement, BGE had invested $78.4$314.7 million at December 31, 2007 and $60.6 million at December 31, 2006.2009.

                  As part of the ring-fencing measures required by the Maryland PSC in its order approving the transaction with EDF, BGE ceased participation in the cash pool on January 7, 2010.

                  BGE's Consolidated Balance Sheets include intercompany amounts related to corporate functions performed at the Constellation Energy holding company, BGE's purchases to meet its standard offer service obligation, BGE's charges to Constellation Energy and its nonregulated affiliates for certain services it provides them, Constellation Energy and its nonregulated affiliates' charges to BGE, and the participation of BGE's employees in the Constellation Energy defined benefit plans.

                  We believe our allocation methods are reasonable and approximate the costs that would be charged to unaffiliated entities.
          159



          Table of Contents

          17Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited)

          Our quarterly financial information has not been audited but, in management's opinion, includes all adjustments necessary for a fair statement. Our business is seasonal in nature with the peak sales periods generally occurring during the summer and winter months. Accordingly, comparisons among quarters of a year may not represent overall trends and changes in operations.

          2007 Quarterly Data—Constellation Energy

           
          2007 Quarterly Data—BGE

           
           Revenues
           Income
          from
          Operations

           Income
          from
          Continuing
          Operations

           Earnings
          Applicable
          to
          Common
          Stock

           Earnings
          Per Share
          from
          Continuing
          Operations-
          Diluted

           Earnings Per
          Share of
          Common
          Stock-
          Diluted

           
           
           Revenues
           Income
          from
          Operations

           Earnings
          Applicable
          to Common
          Stock


           

           
           (In millions, except per share amounts)
           
           
           (In millions)
          Quarter Ended                   Quarter Ended         
           March 31 $5,111.1 $302.4 $197.3 $195.7 $1.08 $1.07     March 31 $922.1 $136.0 $66.0
           June 30  4,876.3  154.4  116.3  116.3  0.64  0.64     June 30  707.1  50.5  13.6
           September 30  5,856.4  425.1  250.7  251.4  1.37  1.38     September 30  896.9  66.5  24.4
           December 31  5,349.4  452.5  258.1  258.1  1.42  1.42     December 31  892.4  81.3  22.6

           
          Year Ended                   Year Ended         
           December 31 $21,193.2 $1,334.4 $822.4 $821.5 $4.51 $4.50     December 31 $3,418.5 $334.3 $126.6

           

          2010 Quarterly Data—Constellation Energy
            
            
            
            
            
           
           
            
            
            
           Net
          Income
          (Loss)
          Attributable
          to
          Common
          Stock

            
            
           2010 Quarterly Data—BGE
           
           
           Revenues
           Income
          (Loss)
          from
          Operations

           Net
          Income
          (Loss)

           Earnings (Loss)
          Per Share
          from
          Operations—
          Diluted

           Earnings (Loss)
          Per Share
          of
          Common
          Stock—
          Diluted

            
           Revenues
           Income
          from
          Operations

           Net
          Income

           Net
          Income
          Attributable
          to
          Common
          Stock

           
              
           
           (In millions, except per share amounts)
            
           (In millions)
           

          Quarter Ended

                             Quarter Ended             
           

          March 31

           $3,586.6 $415.1 $191.3 $191.5 $0.95 $0.95     March 31 $1,069.3 $136.9 $64.4 $61.1 
           

          June 30

            3,309.9  181.9  83.8  72.6  0.36  0.36     June 30  751.5  55.9  17.0  13.7 
           

          September 30

            3,968.9  (2,246.7) (1,375.0) (1,406.5) (6.99) (6.99)    September 30  856.1  75.6  31.8  28.5 
           

          December 31

            3,474.6  406.7  168.1  159.8  0.79  0.79     December 31  784.8  85.8  34.4  31.1 
              

          Year Ended

                             Year Ended             
           

          December 31

           $14,340.0 $(1,243.0)$(931.8)$(982.6)$(4.90)$(4.90)    December 31 $3,461.7 $354.2 $147.6 $134.4 
              

          The sum of the quarterly earnings per share amounts may not equal the total for the year due to the effects of rounding and dilution as a result of issuing common shares during the year. Constellation Energy revenues for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 and June 30, 2007 have been reclassified to conform with the current presentation.dilution.

          First quarter results include:

            a $1.6$8.8 million loss after-tax charge for the discontinued operationsdeferred income tax expense impact relating to federal subsidies for providing post-employment prescription drug benefits,
            a $30.9 million after-tax loss for the early retirement of our High Desert Facility.2012 Notes,
            a $25.7 million after-tax charge for amortization of the basis difference in CENG,
            a $25.7 million after-tax charge for the impact of the PPA with CENG, and
            a $2.9 million after-tax amortization of credit facility amendment fees in connection with the EDF transaction.

          Second quarter results include:

            a $8.0$37.0 million gain after-tax on salescharge for amortization of equity of CEP,the basis difference in CENG,
            a $12.2$29.1 million after-tax charge after-tax related to a cancelled wind development project,for the impact of the PPA with CENG, and
            workforce reduction costs totaling $1.4a $2.9 million after-tax.after-tax amortization of credit facility amendment fees in connection with the EDF transaction.

          Third quarter results include:

            a $24.3$1,465.3 million gain after-tax on salescharge for the impairment of certain of our equity of CEP, andmethod investments,
            a $0.6$31.5 million loss after-tax charge for amortization of the basis difference in CENG,
            a $28.9 million after-tax charge for the discontinued operationsimpact of the PPA with CENG,
            a $24.7 million after-tax gain on the sale of our Hawaiianinterest in the Mammoth Lakes geothermal generating facility, and
            a $1.3$2.9 million gain after-tax foramortization of credit facility amendment fees in connection with the discontinued operations of our High Desert Facility.EDF transaction.

          Fourth quarter results include:

            a $6.9$21.8 million after-tax charge for an impairment and an adjustment to income tax expenses associated with certain of our equity method investments,
            a $23.3 million after-tax charge for amortization of the basis difference in CENG,
            a $29.6 million after-tax charge for the impact of the PPA with CENG,
            a $35.4 million after-tax gain on the settlement of an international coal contract dispute,
            a $121.3 million after-tax gain on salesthe comprehensive agreement with EDF, and
            a $4.9 million after-tax amortization of equity of CEP.credit facility amendment fees in connection with the EDF transaction.

                  We discuss these items inNote 2.

          2006 Quarterly Data—Constellation Energy

           
           
            
            
            
           
            
            
            
            
           Earnings
          Per Share
          from
          Continuing
          Operations-
          Diluted

            
           
           
            
            
            
           
            
            
            
           Earnings
          Applicable
          to
          Common
          Stock

           Earnings Per
          Share of
          Common
          Stock-
          Diluted

           
          2006 Quarterly Data—BGE

           
           Revenues
           Income
          from
          Operations

           Income
          from
          Continuing
          Operations

           
           
           Revenues
           Income
          from
          Operations

           Earnings
          Applicable
          to Common
          Stock


           

           
           (In millions, except per share amounts)
           
           
           (In millions)
          Quarter Ended                   Quarter Ended         
           March 31 $4,859.2 $204.0 $101.6 $113.9 $0.56 $0.63     March 31 $924.2 $141.1 $68.4
           June 30  4,378.8  178.3  74.0  93.1  0.41  0.52     June 30  642.3  58.5  18.4
           September 30  5,393.4  530.9  306.4  324.4  1.69  1.79     September 30  764.5  83.0  35.6
           December 31  4,653.5  420.3  266.6  405.0  1.46  2.22     December 31  684.4  86.5  34.7

           
          Year Ended                   Year Ended         
           December 31 $19,284.9 $1,333.5 $748.6 $936.4 $4.12 $5.16     December 31 $3,015.4 $369.1 $157.1

           


          160


          Table of Contents

          2009 Quarterly Data—Constellation Energy
           2009 Quarterly Data—BGE
           
           
           Revenues
           Income
          (Loss)
          from
          Operations

           Net
          Income
          (Loss)

           Net
          Income
          Attributable
          to
          Common
          Stock

           Earnings (Loss)
          Per Share
          from
          Operations—
          Diluted

           Earnings (Loss)
          Per Share
          of Common
          Stock—
          Diluted

            
           Revenues
           Income
          (Loss)
          from
          Operations

           Net
          Income

           Net
          Income
          Attributable
          to
          Common
          Stock

           
              
           
           (In millions, except per share amounts)
            
           (In millions)
           
          Quarter Ended                   Quarter Ended             
           March 31 $4,303.4 $(212.1)$(119.7)$(123.5)$(0.62)$(0.62)    March 31 $1,193.7 $168.7 $85.0 $81.7 
           June 30  3,864.1  230.6  28.3  8.1  0.04  0.04     June 30  767.4  54.3  16.0  12.7 
           September 30  4,027.7  534.3  167.4  137.6  0.69  0.69     September 30  866.5  78.7  32.3  28.6 
           December 31  3,403.6  7,428.2  4,427.4  4,421.2  21.96  21.96     December 31  751.4  (33.3) (42.6) (38.2)
              
          Year Ended                   Year Ended             
           December 31 $15,598.8 $7,981.0 $4,503.4 $4,443.4 $22.19 $22.19     December 31 $3,579.0 $268.4 $90.7 $84.8 
              

          The sum of the quarterly earnings per share amounts may not equal the total for the year due to the effects of rounding and dilution as a result of issuing common shares during the year.dilution.


          First quarter results include:

            an $11.4a $184.2 million gain after-tax forloss on the discontinued operationssale of a majority of our High Desert facility,international commodities operation, the reclassification of losses on previously designated cash-flow hedges from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss, and earnings that are no longer part of our core business,
            a $0.9$5.1 million gain after-tax charge for the discontinued operationsimpairment of our other nonregulated international operations,investment in CEP LLC,
            merger-relateda $23.8 million after-tax charge for the impairment of certain of our nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments,
            a $6.0 million after-tax charge for certain long-lived assets that ceased to be used in connection with the divestiture of a majority of our international commodities operation and our Houston-based gas trading operation,
            merger termination and strategic alternatives costs totaling $1.5$42.3 million after-tax, of which BGE recorded $0.5 million after-tax, and
            workforce reduction costs totaling $1.3$4.2 million after-tax.after-tax, and
            a $3.7 million after-tax amortization of credit facility amendment fees in connection with the EDF transaction.

          Second quarter results include:

            a $19.1$123.8 million gain after-tax loss on the sale of a majority of our international commodities operation, our Houston-based gas trading operation, certain other trading operations, and a uranium market participant, the reclassification of losses on previously designated cash-flow hedges from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss, and earnings that are no longer part of our core business,
            a $59.0 million after-tax charge for the discontinued operationsimpairment of our High Desert facility,shipping joint venture,
            a $6.1 million after-tax charge for the impairment of certain of our nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments,
            a $4.9 million after-tax charge for certain long-lived assets that ceased to be used in connections with the divestiture of a majority of our international commodities operation and our Houston-based gas trading operation as well as the write-off of an uncollectible advance to an affiliate,
            a $1.5 million after-tax charge for the impairment of our investment in CEP LLC,
            merger termination and strategic alternatives costs totaling $4.0 million after-tax,
            workforce reduction costs totaling $1.1 million after-tax, and
            merger-related costs totaling $6.0a $5.2 million after-tax amortization of which BGE recorded $1.6 million after-tax.credit facility amendment fees in connection with the EDF transaction.

          Third quarter results include:

            an $18.0a $62.9 million gain after-tax loss on the sale of a majority of our international commodities operation, our Houston-based gas trading operation, certain other trading operations, and a uranium market participant, the reclassification of losses on previously designated cash-flow hedges from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss, and earnings that are no longer part of our core business,
            a $19.7 million after-tax charge for the discontinued operationsimpairment of certain of our High Desert facility,nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments (primarily due to income tax adjustments),
            a $9.0 million after-tax charge for certain long-lived assets that ceased to be used in connection with the divestiture of a majority of our international commodities operation and our Houston-based gas trading operation,
            merger termination and strategic alternatives costs totaling $4.9 million after-tax,
            workforce reduction costs totaling $13.1$1.6 million after-tax, and
            merger-related costs totaling $2.5a $8.2 million after-tax amortization of which BGE recorded $0.7 million after-tax.credit facility amendment fees in connection with the EDF transaction.

          Fourth quarter results include:

            a $47.1$4,456.1 million after-tax gain after-tax on sale of gas-fired plants,a 49.99% membership interest in CENG to EDF,
            a $17.9$17.8 million gain after-tax charge for amortization of the basis difference in CENG,


          161


          Table of Contents

            a $1.0 million after-tax loss on the initial public offeringsale of CEP,a majority of our international commodities operation, our Houston-based gas trading operation, certain other trading operations, and a uranium market participant, the reclassification of losses on previously designated cash-flow hedges from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss, and earnings that are no longer part of our core business,
            a $138.4$3.6 million gain after-tax charge for certain long-lived assets that ceased to be used in connections with the divestiture of a majority of our international commodities operation and our Houston-based gas trading operation,
            a $7.1 million after-tax charge for the discontinued operationsimpairment of BGE's nonregulated subsidiary, District Chilled Water, net of noncontrolling interest,
            a $2.8 million after-tax benefit for the impairment of certain of our High Desert facility,nuclear decommissioning trust fund investments (primarily due to income tax adjustments),
            a $10.0 million after-tax loss on redemption of our zero coupon senior notes,
            a $67.1 million after-tax charge for a BGE customer rate credit,
            merger termination and strategic alternatives costs benefit totaling $37.4 million after-tax due to a true-up for 2008 and 2009 expenses that became tax deductible upon the close of the transaction with EDF on November 6, 2009,
            workforce reduction costs totaling $2.6$2.4 million after-tax, and
            tax benefits associated with merger-related costs totaling $(4.3)a $20.6 million after-tax of which BGE recorded $(1.6) million after-tax.credit facility amendment and termination fees in connection with the EDF transaction.

                  We discuss these items inNote 2.


          162


          Table of Contents



          Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

          None.



          Items 9A and 9A(T).Item 9A. Controls and Procedures

          Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

          The principal executive officersofficer and principal financial officer of both Constellation Energy and BGE have each evaluated the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act")) as of December 31, 20072010 (the "Evaluation Date"). Based on such evaluation, such officers have concluded that, as of the Evaluation Date, Constellation Energy's disclosure controls and procedures are effective in providing reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed in the reports that Constellation Energy files and submits under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported when required and is accumulated and communicated to management, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

                  The principal executive officer and principal financial officer of BGE have each evaluated the effectiveness of BGE's disclosure controls and procedures as of the Evaluation Date. Based on such evaluation, such officers have concluded that, as of the Evaluation Date, BGE's disclosure controls and procedures are effective.effective in providing reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed in the reports that BGE files and submits under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported when required and is accumulated and communicated to management, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

          Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

          Each of Constellation Energy and BGE maintains a system of internal control over financial reporting as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). The Management's Reports on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting of each of Constellation Energy and BGE are included inItem 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data included in this report. As BGE is not an accelerated filer as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2, its Management's Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting is not deemed to be filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act as permitted by the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

          Changes in Internal Control

          During the quarter ended December 31, 2007,2010, there has been no change in either Constellation Energy's or BGE's internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, either Constellation Energy's or BGE's internal control over financial reporting.



          Item 9B. Other Information

          None.




          PART III

          BGE meets the conditions set forth in General Instruction I(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-K for a reduced disclosure format. Accordingly, all items in this section related to BGE are not presented.


          Item 10. Directors, and Executive Officers of the Registrantand Corporate Governance

          The information required by this item with respect to directors and corporate governance will be set forth underProposal No. 1: Election of Directors in the Proxy Statement and incorporated herein by reference.

                  The information required by this item with respect to executive officers of Constellation Energy, Group, pursuant to instruction 3 of paragraph (b) of Item 401 of Regulation S-K, is set forth followingItem 4 of Part I of this Form 10-K underExecutive Officers of the Registrant.


          Item 11. Executive Compensation

          The information required by this item will be set forth underExecutive and Director Compensation andReport of Compensation Committee in the Proxy Statement and incorporated herein by reference.


          163


          Table of Contents



          Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Shareholder Matters

          The additional information required by this item will be set forth underStock Ownership in the Proxy Statement and incorporated herein by reference.


          Equity Compensation Plan Information

          The following table reflects our equity compensation plan information as of December 31, 2007:2010:

           
           (a)
           (b)
           (c)
          Plan Category
           Number of securities
          to be issued upon
          exercise of
          outstanding options,
          warrants, and rights

           Weighted-average
          exercise price of
          outstanding options,
          warrants, and rights

           Number of securities remaining
          available for future issuance
          under equity compensation
          plans (excluding securities
          reflected in item (a))


           
           (In thousands)
            
           (In thousands)
          Equity compensation plans approved by security holders 5,097 $58.79 9,245
          Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders 1,048 $41.83 

          Total 6,145 $55.90 9,245

           
           (a)
           (b)
           (c)
           
          Plan Category
           Number of securities
          to be issued upon
          exercise of
          outstanding options,
          warrants, and rights

           Weighted-average
          exercise price of
          outstanding options,
          warrants, and rights

           Number of securities remaining
          available for future issuance
          under equity compensation
          plans (excluding securities
          reflected in item (a))

           
            
           
           (In thousands)
            
           (In thousands)
           

          Equity compensation plans approved by security holders

            8,451 $43.44  12,818 

          Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders

            619 $43.20   
            

          Total

            9,070 $43.43  12,818 
            

          The plans that do not require shareholder approval are the Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 2002 Senior Management Long-Term Incentive Plan (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(p)10(j)) and the Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Management Long-Term Incentive Plan (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(q)10(k)). A brief description of the material features of each of these plans is set forth below.

          2002 Senior Management Long-Term Incentive Plan

          The 2002 Senior Management Long-Term Incentive Plan became effective May 24, 2002 and authorized the issuance of up to 4,000,000 shares of Constellation Energy common stock in connection with the grant of equity awards. No further awards will be made under this plan. Any shares covered by an outstanding award that is forfeited or cancelled, expires or is settled in cash will become available for issuance under the shareholder-approved Amended and Restated 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan. Shares delivered pursuant to awards under this plan may be authorized and unissued shares or shares purchased on the open market in accordance with the applicable securities laws. Restricted stock, restricted stock unit, and performance unit award payouts will be accelerated and stock options and stock appreciation rights gains will be paid in cash in the event of a change in control, as defined in the plan. The plan is administered by Constellation Energy's Chief Executive Officer.


          Management Long-Term Incentive Plan

          The Management Long-Term Incentive Plan became effective February 1, 1998 and authorized the issuance of up to 3,000,000 shares of Constellation Energy common stock in connection with the grant of equity awards. No further awards will be made under this plan. Any shares covered by an outstanding award that is forfeited or cancelled, expires or is settled in cash will become available for issuance under the shareholder-approved Amended and Restated 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan. Shares delivered pursuant to awards under the plan may be authorized and unissued shares or shares purchased on the open market in accordance with applicable securities laws. Restricted stock, restricted stock units, and performance unit award payouts will be accelerated and stock options and stock appreciation rights will become fully exercisable in the event of a change in control, as defined by the plan. The plan is administered by Constellation Energy's Chief Executive Officer.


          Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence

          The additional information required by this item will be set forth underRelated Persons Transactions andDetermination of Independence in the Proxy Statement and incorporated herein by reference.


          Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services

          The information required by this item will be set forth underRatification of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for 20082011 in the Proxy Statement and incorporated herein by reference.


          164


          Table of Contents


          PART IV

          Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

           

          (a) The following documents are filed as a part of this Report:


          1.


          Financial Statements:

           

          1.

          Financial Statements:

          Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated February 26, 2008March 1, 2011 of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

           

          Consolidated Statements of Income—Income (Loss)—Constellation Energy Group for three years ended December 31, 20072010

           

          Consolidated Balance Sheets—Constellation Energy Group at December 31, 20072010 and December 31, 20062009

           

          Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows—Constellation Energy Group for three years ended December 31, 20072010

           

          Consolidated Statements of Common Shareholders' Equity and Comprehensive Income—Income (Loss)—Constellation Energy Group for three years ended December 31, 20072010

           Consolidated Statements of Capitalization—Constellation Energy Group at December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006

           

          Consolidated Statements of Income—Baltimore Gas and Electric Company for three years ended December 31, 20072010

           

          Consolidated Balance Sheets—Baltimore Gas and Electric Company at December 31, 20072010 and December 31, 20062009

           

          Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows—Baltimore Gas and Electric Company for three years ended December 31, 20072010

           

          Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements


          2.


          Financial Statement Schedules:

           

          2.

          Financial Statement Schedules:

          Schedule II—Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

           

          Schedules other than Schedule II are omitted as not applicable or not required.


          3.

          3.


          Exhibits Required by Item 601 of Regulation S-K.



          Exhibit
          Number







          *2Agreement and Plan of Share Exchange between Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Constellation Energy Group, Inc. dated as of February 19, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2 to the Registration Statement on Form S-4 dated March 3, 1999, File No. 33-64799.)
          *2(a) Agreement and Plan of Reorganization and Corporate Separation (Nuclear). (Designated as Exhibit No. 2(a) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 7, 2000, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *2(b) Agreement and Plan of Reorganization and Corporate Separation (Fossil). (Designated as Exhibit No. 2(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 7, 2000, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *2(c) Asset Purchase and Sale Agreement, by and between Constellation Power, Inc. and TPF Generation Holdings, LLC dated as of October 10, 2006.August 7, 2010, by and among EBG Holdings LLC, Boston Generating, LLC, Mystic I, LLC, Fore River Development, LLC, BG Boston Services, LLC, BG New England Power Services, Inc., Constellation Holdings, Inc. and Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Designated as Exhibit 2(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *2(d)Termination and Release Agreement, dated October 24, 2006, by and among Constellation Energy Group, Inc., FPL Group, Inc. and CF Merger Corporation (Designated as ExhibitNo. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 25, 2006,August 11, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.No. 1-12869.)
          *3(a)*2(d) ArticlesMaster Agreement, dated as of AmendmentOctober 26, 2010, by and Restatement of the Charter ofbetween Electricite de France, S.A. and Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of April 30, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.22.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 30, 1999,November 1, 2010, File No. 1-1910.1-12869.)
          *2(e)Put Termination Agreement dated as of November 3, 2010, by and among EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), E.D.F. International S.A., Constellation Nuclear, LLC, and Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 8, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)
          *3(b)(a) Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., as of December 17, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 17, 2008, File No. 1-12869.)
          *3(b)Correction to Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of November 25, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(c) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *3(c)Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of September 19, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 19, 2008, File No. 1-12869.)


          165


          Table of Contents

          Exhibit
          Number


          *3(d)Articles of Amendment to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of July 19, 1999.21, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter endeddated June 30, 1999,2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *3(c)(e)Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of April 10, 2007. (Designated as Exhibit 3(a) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 10, 2007, File No. 1-12869.)
          *3(f)Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of November 20, 2001. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(e) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *3(g) Certificate of Correction to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of September 13, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(c) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

          *3(d)(h)Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., as of July 19, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 19, 1999, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *3(i)Amended and Restated Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of April 30, 1999. (Designated as Appendix B to Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-4 filed March 3, 1999, File No. 33-64799.)
          *3(j)Bylaws of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., as amended to July 18, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 18, 2008, File No. 1-12869.)
          *3(k)Articles of Amendment to the Charter of BGE as of February 2, 2010. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File No. 1-1910.)
          *3(l) Charter of BGE, restated as of August 16, 1996. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1996, File No. 1-1910.)
          *3(e)Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of November 20, 2001. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(e) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *3(f)(m) Bylaws of BGE, as amended to October 16, 1998.February 4, 2010. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1998, File No. 1-1910.)
          *3(g)Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of April 10, 2007 (Designated as Exhibit 3(a)3.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 10, 2007,February 4, 2010, File No. 1-12869.1-1910.)
          3(h)Bylaws of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., as amended to February 22, 2008.
          *4(a) Indenture between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and the Bank of New York, Trustee dated as of March 24, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(a) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated March 29, 1999, File No. 333-75217.)
          *4(b) First Supplemental Indenture between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and the Bank of New York, Trustee dated as of January 24, 2003. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated January 24, 2003, File No. 333-102723.)
          *4(c) Indenture dated as of July 24, 2006 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(a) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed July 24, 2006, File No. 333-135991.)
          *4(d)First Supplemental Indenture between BGEConstellation Energy Group, Inc. and BankersDeutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee,trustee, dated as of June 20, 1995, supplementing, amending27, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit 4(a) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 30, 2008, File No. 1-12869.)
          *4(e)Indenture dated June 19, 2008 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and restating Deed ofDeutsche Bank Trust dated February 1, 1919.Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit No. 44(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 1995, File No. 1-1910); as supplemented by Supplemental Indentures dated as of June 15, 1996 (Designated as Exhibit No. 4 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 1996,) and as of June 26, 2000 (Designated as Exhibit 4(c) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006,2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *4(d)(f) Indenture dated July 1, 1985, between BGE and The Bank of New York (Successor to Mercantile-Safe Deposit and Trusttrust Company), Trustee. (Designated as Exhibit 4(a) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3, File No. 2-98443); as supplemented by Supplemental Indentures dated as of October 1, 1987 (Designated as Exhibit 4(a) to the Current Report on Form 8-K, dated November 13, 1987, File No. 1-1910) and as of January 26, 1993 (Designated as Exhibit 4(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K, dated January 29, 1993, File No. 1-1910.)
          *4(e)(g) Form of Subordinated Indenture between the CompanyBGE and The Bank of New York, as Trustee in connection with the issuance of the Junior Subordinated Debentures. (Designated as Exhibit 4(d) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)


          166


          Table of Contents

          Exhibit
          Number


          *4(f)(h) Form of Supplemental Indenture between the CompanyBGE and The Bank of New York, as Trustee in connection with the issuancesissuance of the Junior Subordinated Debentures. (Designated as Exhibit 4(e) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)
          *4(g)(i) Form of Preferred Securities Guarantee (Designated as Exhibit 4(f) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)
          *4(h)(j) Form of Junior Subordinated Debenture (Designated as Exhibit 4(h)4(e) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)
          *4(i)(k) Form of Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust (including Form of Preferred Security) (Designated as Exhibit 4(c) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)
          *4(j)(l) Indenture dated as of July 24, 2006 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit 4(a) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed July 24, 2006, File No. 333-135991.)
          *4(k)Indenture dated as of July 24, 2006 between Baltimore Gas and Electric CompanyBGE and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit 4(b) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed July 24, 2006, File No. 333-135991.)

          *4(l)(m) First Supplemental Indenture between Baltimore Gas and Electric CompanyBGE and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee, dated as of October 13, 2006. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *4(m)(n)Indenture and Security Agreement dated as of July 9, 2009, between BGE and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee (including form of BGE Officer's Certificate and form of Senior Secured Bond) (Designated as Exhibit Nos. 4(u) and 4(u)(1) to Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated July 9, 2009, File Nos. 333-157637 and 333-157637-01.)
          *4(o)Supplemental Indenture No. 1, dated as of October 1, 2009, to the Indenture and Security Agreement dated as of July 9, 2009, between BGE and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(c) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *4(p)BGE Deed of Easement and Right-of-Way Grant dated as of July 9, 2009 (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(u)(2) to Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated July 9, 2009, File Nos. 333-157637 and 333-157637-01.)
          *4(q) Indenture dated as of June 29, 2007, by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee and Securities Intermediary. (Designated as Exhibit 4.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 5, 2007, File No. 1-1910.)
          *4(n)(r) Series Supplement to Indenture dated as of June 29, 2007 by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee and Securities Intermediary (Designated as Exhibit 4.2No. 4(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, File No. 1-1910.)
          *4(s)Replacement Capital Covenant dated June 27, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 5, 2007,June 30, 2008, File No. 1-1910.1-12869.)
          *4(t)Officers' Certificate, dated December 14, 2010, establishing the 5.15% Notes due December 1, 2020 of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., with the form of Notes attached thereto. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 14, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)
          +*10(a) Executive Annual Incentive Plan of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(d) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          +*10(b)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(c)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(c) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          167


          Table of Contents

          Exhibit
          Number


          +*10(d)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Benefits Restoration Plan, amended and restated effective June 1, 2010. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          +*10(e)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Supplemental Pension Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(e) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          +*10(f)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Senior Executive Supplemental Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(f) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          +*10(g)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Executive Supplemental Benefits Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004,June 30, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          +*10(b)(h) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 1995 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(c)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(c) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(d)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(e)Amended and restated change in control severance agreement between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Thomas V. Brooks. (Designated as Exhibit 10(f) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005.)
          *10(f)Grantor Trust Agreement Dated as of February 27, 2004 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Citibank, N.A. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(d) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(g)Amended and restated change in control severance agreement between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Mayo A. Shattuck III. (Designated as Exhibit 10.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 19, 2005, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(h)Grantor Trust Agreement dated as of February 27, 2004 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and T. Rowe Price Trust Company. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          +*10(i)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Benefits Restoration Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(m) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(j)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Supplemental Pension Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(d) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(k)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Senior Executive Supplemental Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(e) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(l)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Supplemental Benefits Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(p) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(m) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Executive Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

          +*10(n)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 2002 Executive Annual Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(o) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(o)(j) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 2002 Senior Management Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(c) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          +*10(p)(k) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Management Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(d) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          +*10(q)Summary of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Board of Directors Non-Employee Director Compensation Program. (Designated as Exhibit 10(x) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(r)(l) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Amended and Restated 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan. (Designated as Exhibit 10(t) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(s)Investor Agreement, dated July 20, 2007, by and between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Electricite de France International, SA (Designated as ExhibitNo. 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 25, 2007,June 4, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)
          +*10(t)(m) Agreed Upon Departure Term Sheet, dated May 18, 2007, by and between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and E. Follin SmithConsent of Mayo A. Shattuck III to termination of change-in-control agreement. (Designated as Exhibit 10(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(u)Letter Agreement, dated October 31, 2007, by and between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., as agent for JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Associates, London Branch (Designated as ExhibitNo. 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 1, 2007,December 10, 2009, File No. 1-12869.)
          +*10(v)(n) Rate Stabilization Property Purchase and Sale Agreement dated asConsent of June 29, 2007 by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, as sellerMichael J. Wallace to termination of change-in-control agreement. (Designated as Exhibit 10.1No. 10.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 5, 2007,December 10, 2009, File No. 1-1910.1-12869.)
          +*10(w)(o)Consent of Henry B. Barron, Jr. to termination of change-in-control agreement. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2009, File No. 1-12869.)
          *10(p) Rate Stabilization Property ServiceServicing Agreement dated as of June 29, 2007 by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, as servicer (Designated as Exhibit 10.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 5, 2007, File No. 1-1910.)
          *10(x)(q) Administration Agreement dated as of June 29, 2007 by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, as administrator (Designated as Exhibit 10.3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 5, 2007, File No. 1-1910.)
          *10(y)(r) Second Amended and restated change in control severance agreement betweenRestated Operating Agreement, dated as of November 6, 2009, by and among Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Development Inc., and for certain limited purposes, E.D.F. International S.A. and Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and John R. Collins (Designated as Exhibit 10(bb)No. 10.1 to the AnnualCurrent Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005,8-K dated November 12, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.No. 1-12869.)
          10(s)Amendment No. 1 to the Second Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, by and among Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), and E.D.F. International S.A.
          10(t)Amendment No. 2 to the Second Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, by and among Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), and E.D.F. International S.A.


          168


          Table of Contents

          Exhibit
          Number


          *10(u)Amendment No. 3 to the Second Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, by and among Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), and E.D.F. International S.A. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 3, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)
          *10(v)Credit Agreement, dated as of October 15, 2010, among Constellation Energy Group, Inc., Bank of America, N.A., as a letter of credit issuing bank, swingline lender and administrative agent, Banc of America Securities LLC, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., RBS Securities Inc., BNP Paribas Securities Corp., and The Bank of Nova Scotia, as joint lead arranger and book runners, Citibank, N.A. and The Royal Bank of Scotland plc, as co-syndication agents and The Bank of Nova Scotia and BNP Paribas, as co-documentation agents and the other lenders named therein. (Designated as Exhibit 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 21, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)
          *10(w)Termination Agreement dated as of November 3, 2010, by and among EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), E.D.F. International S.A., and Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 3, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)
          +10(x)Form of Grant Agreement for Stock Units with Sales Restriction.
          12(a) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.
          12(b) Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiaries Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and Preferred and Preference Dividend Requirements.
          21  Subsidiaries of the Registrant.
          23(a) Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.
          23(b)Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm (for Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC).
          31(a) Certification of Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
          31(b) Certification of ExecutiveSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
          31(c) Certification of President and Chief Executive Officer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

          31(d) Certification of Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
          32(a) Certification of Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
          32(b) Certification of ExecutiveSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
          32(c) Certification of President and Chief Executive Officer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
          32(d) Certification of Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
          99(a)Audited Financial Statements of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.
          *99(b)Operating Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2010, by and among RF HoldCo LLC, Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and GSS Holdings (BGE Utility), Inc. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          169


          Table of Contents

          Exhibit
          Number


          *99(c)Contribution Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2010, by and among Constellation Energy Group, Inc., BGE and RF HoldCo LLC. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *99(d)Purchase Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2010, by and between RF HoldCo LLC and GSS Holdings (BGE Utility), Inc. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          101.INSXBRL Instance Document
          101.SCHXBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document
          101.PREXBRL Taxonomy Presentation Linkbase Document
          101.LABXBRL Taxonomy Label Linkbase Document
          101.CALXBRL Taxonomy Calculation Linkbase Document
          101.DEFXBRL Taxonomy Definition Linkbase Document
          +
          Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.

          *
          Incorporated by Reference.

                  In accordance with Rule 402 of Regulation S-T, the XBRL related information in Exhibit 101 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K shall not be deemed to be "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section, and shall not be incorporated by reference into any registration statement or other document filed under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except as shall be expressly set forth by specific reference in such filing.


          170


          Table of Contents


          CONSTELLATION ENERGY GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
          AND
          BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES

          SCHEDULE II—VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS

          Column A

           Column B
           Column C
           Column D
           Column E
           
           
            
           Additions
            
            
           
          Description

           Balance
          at
          beginning
          of period

           Charged
          to costs
          and expenses

           Charged to
          Other
          Accounts—
          Describe

           (Deductions)—
          Describe

           Balance at
          end of
          period

           
           
           (In millions)

           
          Reserves deducted in the Balance Sheet from the assets to which they apply:                

          Constellation Energy

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           
           Accumulated Provision for Uncollectibles                
            2007 $48.9 $31.3 $ $(35.3)(A)$44.9 
            2006  47.4  29.7    (28.2)(A) 48.9 
            2005  43.1  30.9    (26.6)(A) 47.4 
           Valuation Allowance                
            Net unrealized (gain) loss on available for sale securities                
            2007  (18.5)   1.2 (B)   (17.3)
            2006  0.6    (19.1)(B)   (18.5)
            2005  0.1    0.5 (B)   0.6 
            Net unrealized (gain) loss on nuclear decommissioning trust funds                
            2007  (206.1)   (50.6)(B)   (256.7)
            2006  (110.3)   (95.8)(B)   (206.1)
            2005  (73.3)   (37.0)(B)   (110.3)

          BGE

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           
           Accumulated Provision for Uncollectibles                
            2007  16.1  21.0    (16.0)(A) 21.1 
            2006  13.0  18.1    (15.0)(A) 16.1 
            2005  13.0  14.1    (14.1)(A) 13.0 

          Column A Column B Column C Column D Column E 
           
            
           Additions  
            
           
          Description
           Balance at
          beginning
          of period
           Charged
          to costs
          and expenses
           Charged to
          Other Accounts—
          Describe
           (Deductions)—
          Describe
           Balance at
          end of
          period
           
           
           (In millions)
           

          Reserves deducted in the Balance Sheet from the assets to which they apply:

                          

          Constellation Energy

                          
           

          Accumulated Provision for Uncollectibles

                          
            

          2010

           $160.6 $76.2 $27.6 (B)$(91.5)(C)$172.9 
            

          2009

            240.6  71.2  (5.0)(A) (146.2)(C) 160.6 
            

          2008

            44.9  127.1  102.3 (B) (33.7)(C) 240.6 
           

          Valuation Allowance

                          
            

          Net unrealized (gain) loss on available for sale securities

                          
            

          2010

            (2.8)   (0.1)(D)   (2.9)
            

          2009

            2.1  (3.6) (1.3)(D)   (2.8)
            

          2008

            (17.3) 7.0  0.3 (D) 12.1 (E) 2.1 
            

          Net unrealized (gain) loss on nuclear decommissioning trust funds

                          
            

          2010

                     
            

          2009

            (49.6)   (201.0)(D) 250.6 (F)  
            

          2008

            (256.7)   207.1 (D)   (49.6)

          BGE

                          
           

          Accumulated Provision for Uncollectibles

                          
            

          2010

            47.2  45.6    (56.9)(C) 35.9 
            

          2009

            34.2  41.8    (28.8)(C) 47.2 
            

          2008

            21.1  34.5    (21.4)(C) 34.2 
          (A)
          Represents amounts recorded as an increase to nonregulated revenues resulting from a settlement with a counterparty that was in default.

          (B)
          Represents amounts recorded as a reduction to nonregulated revenues resulting from liquidated damages claims upon termination of derivatives or other contracts which were determined to be uncollectible.

          (C)
          Represents principally net amounts charged off as uncollectible.

          (B)(D)
          Represents amounts recorded in or reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income.loss.

          (E)
          Represents sale of a marketable security.

          (F)
          Represents decrease due to the deconsolidation of CENG.


          171


          Table of Contents


          SIGNATURES

          Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Constellation Energy Group, Inc., the Registrant, has duly caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

             CONSTELLATION ENERGY GROUP, INC.
          (REGISTRANT)
           
           
          Date: February 26, 2008March 1, 2011

           

          By


          /s/


          MAYO A. SHATTUCK III

           

             
          Mayo A. Shattuck III
          Chairman of the Board, President and
          Chief
          Executive Officer

          Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., the Registrant, and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

          Signature
           
          Title
           
          Date



           

           

           

           

           

           

           
          Principal executive officer and director:    

          By

          /s/

          /s/


          M. A. Shattuck III

           

          Chairman of the Board,
          President, Chief Executive
          Officer, and Director

           

          February 26, 2008March 1, 2011
           

          M. A. Shattuck III

            
            

          Principal financial officer:

           

           

          By

          /s/

          J. R. Collins

           

          Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer/s/

           

          February 26, 2008J. W. Thayer


          Senior Vice President and
          Chief Financial Officer


          March 1, 2011
           

          J. R. CollinsW. Thayer

            
            

          Principal accounting officer:

           

           

          By

          /s/

          R. K. Feuerman

           

          Vice President, Controller and Chief Accounting Officer/s/

           

          February 26, 2008B. P. Wright


          Vice President, Chief
          Accounting Officer, and
          Controller


          March 1, 2011
           

          R. K. FeuermanB. P. Wright

            
            

          Directors:

           

           

          /s/

          Y. C. de Balmann


          Director


          February 26, 2008

          Y. C. de Balmann


          Director

          March 1, 2011

          Y. C. de Balmann

          /s/


          A. C.C Berzin

           

          Director

           

          February 26, 2008March 1, 2011

          A. C. Berzin




          /s/


          J. T. Brady

           

          Director

           

          February 26, 2008March 1, 2011

          J. T. Brady




          /s/

          E. A. Crooke

          J. R. Curtiss

           

          Director

           

          February 26, 2008March 1, 2011

          E. A. CrookeJ. R. Curtiss




          /s/

          J. R. Curtiss


          Director


          February 26, 2008

          J. R. Curtiss





          /s/

          F. A. Hrabowski, III


          Director


          February 26, 2008

          F. A. Hrabowski, III


          Director


          March 1, 2011

          F. A. Hrabowski, III


          172


          Table of Contents

          Signature
           
          Title
           
          Date










          /s/


          N. Lampton

           

          Director

           

          February 26, 2008March 1, 2011

          N. Lampton




          /s/


          R. J. Lawless

           

          Director

           

          February 26, 2008March 1, 2011

          R. J. Lawless




          /s/


          J. L. Skolds

           

          Director

           

          February 26, 2008March 1, 2011

          J. L. Skolds




          /s/


          M. D. Sullivan

           

          Director

           

          February 26, 2008March 1, 2011

          M. D. Sullivan




          173


          Table of Contents

          Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, the Registrant, has duly caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

            BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
          (REGISTRANT)
           
           
          February 26, 2008March 1, 2011

           

          By


          /s/


          KENNETH W. DEFONTES, JR.

           

             
          Kenneth W. DeFontes, Jr.
          President and Chief Executive Officer

          Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, the Registrant, and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

          Signature
           
          Title
           
          Date



           

           

           

           

           

           

           
          Principal executive officer and director:    

          By

          /s/

          /s/


          K. W. DeFontes, Jr.

           

          President, Chief Executive
          Officer, and Director

           

          February 26, 2008March 1, 2011
           

          K. W. DeFontes, Jr.

            
            

          Principal financial and accounting officer:

           

           

           

           

          By

          /s/

          J. R. Collins

           

          Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer/s/

           

          February 26, 2008C.V. Khouzami


          Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer


          March 1, 2011
           

          J. R. CollinsC. V. Khouzami

            
            

          Directors:

           

           

           

           

          /s/

          T. F. Brady

          M. D. Sullivan

           

          Chairman of the Board of Directors

           

          February 26, 2008March 1, 2011


          T. F. BradyM. D. Sullivan

            
            

          /s/

          M. A. Shattuck III

          T. F. Brady

           

          Director

           

          February 26, 2008March 1, 2011

          T. F. Brady

          /s/

          J. Haskins, Jr.


          Director


          March 1, 2011

          J. Haskins, Jr.

          /s/


          C. D. Hayden


          Director


          March 1, 2011

          C. D. Hayden

          /s/


          M. A. Shattuck III


          Director


          March 1, 2011

          M. A. Shattuck III

          /s/


          M. J. Wallace


          Director


          March 1, 2011

          M. J. Wallace


          174


          Table of Contents


          EXHIBIT INDEX

          Exhibit
          Number
            
            


          EXHIBIT INDEX


          Exhibit Number







          *2 Agreement and Plan of Share Exchange between Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Constellation Energy Group, Inc. dated as of February 19, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2 to the Registration Statement on Form S-4 dated March 3, 1999, File No. 33-64799.)
          *2(a) Agreement and Plan of Reorganization and Corporate Separation (Nuclear). (Designated as Exhibit No. 2(a) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 7, 2000, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          *2

          (b)


           

          Agreement and Plan of Reorganization and Corporate Separation (Fossil). (Designated as Exhibit No. 2(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 7, 2000, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          *2

          (c)


           

          Asset Purchase and Sale Agreement, by and between Constellation Power, Inc. and TPF Generation Holdings, LLC dated as of October 10, 2006.August 7, 2010, by and among EBG Holdings LLC, Boston Generating, LLC, Mystic I, LLC, Fore River Development, LLC, BG Boston Services, LLC, BG New England Power Services, Inc., Constellation Holdings, Inc. and Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Designated as Exhibit 2(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *2(d)Termination and Release Agreement, dated October 24, 2006, by and among Constellation Energy Group, Inc., FPL Group, Inc. and CF Merger Corporation (Designated as ExhibitNo. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 25, 2006,August 11, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.No. 1-12869.)


          *2

          (d)



          Master Agreement, dated as of October 26, 2010, by and between Electricite de France, S.A. and Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 1, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)


          *2

          (e)



          Put Termination Agreement dated as of November 3, 2010, by and among EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), E.D.F. International S.A., Constellation Nuclear, LLC, and Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC. (Designated as Exhibit No. 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 8, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)


          *3

          (a)


           

          Articles of Amendment and Restatement ofSupplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of April 30, 1999.December 17, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.23.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 30, 1999,December 17, 2008, File No. 1-1910.1-12869.)


          *3

          (b)


           

          Correction to Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., as of November 25, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(c) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          *3

          (c)



          Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of September 19, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 19, 2008, File No. 1-12869.)


          *3

          (d)



          Articles of Amendment to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of July 19, 1999.21, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter endeddated June 30, 1999,2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          *3
          (c)
          (e)


           

          Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of April 10, 2007. (Designated as Exhibit 3(a) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 10, 2007, File No. 1-12869.)


          *3

          (f)



          Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of November 20, 2001. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(e) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          *3

          (g)



          Certificate of Correction to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of September 13, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(c) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          *3

          (h)



          Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., as of July 19, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 19, 1999, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          *3

          (i)



          Amended and Restated Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of April 30, 1999. (Designated as Appendix B to Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-4 filed March 3, 1999, File No. 33-64799.)


          *3

          (j)



          Bylaws of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., as amended to July 18, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 18, 2008, File No. 1-12869.)


          *3

          (k)



          Articles of Amendment to the Charter of BGE as of February 2, 2010. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File No. 1-1910.)


          175


          Table of Contents

          Exhibit
          Number


          *3(d)(l) Charter of BGE, restated as of August 16, 1996. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1996, File No. 1-1910.)


          *3
          (e)
          (m)


           
          Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of November 20, 2001. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3(e) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *3(f)
          Bylaws of BGE, as amended to October 16, 1998.February 4, 2010. (Designated as Exhibit No. 3 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1998, File No. 1-1910.)
          *3(g)Articles Supplementary to the Charter of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. as of April 10, 2007 (Designated as Exhibit 3(a)3.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 10, 2007,February 4, 2010, File No. 1-12869.1-1910.)
          3
          (h)
          *4
          Bylaws of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., as amended to February 22, 2008.
          *4
          (a)


           

          Indenture between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and the Bank of New York, Trustee dated as of March 24, 1999. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(a) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated March 29, 1999, File No. 333-75217.)


          *4

          (b)


           

          First Supplemental Indenture between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and the Bank of New York, Trustee dated as of January 24, 2003. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated January 24, 2003, File No. 333-102723.)


          *4

          (c)


           

          Indenture dated as of July 24, 2006 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(a) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed July 24, 2006, File No. 333-135991.)


          *4

          (d)



          First Supplemental Indenture between BGEConstellation Energy Group, Inc. and BankersDeutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee,trustee, dated as of June 20, 1995, supplementing, amending27, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit 4(a) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 30, 2008, File No. 1-12869.)


          *4

          (e)



          Indenture dated June 19, 2008 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and restating Deed ofDeutsche Bank Trust dated February 1, 1919.Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit No. 44(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 1995, File No. 1-1910); as supplemented by Supplemental Indentures dated as of June 15, 1996 (Designated as Exhibit No. 4 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 1996,) and as of June 26, 2000 (Designated as Exhibit 4(c) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006,2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)



          *4
          (d)
          (f)


           

          Indenture dated July 1, 1985, between BGE and The Bank of New York (Successor to Mercantile-Safe Deposit and Trusttrust Company), Trustee. (Designated as Exhibit 4(a) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3, File No. 2-98443); as supplemented by Supplemental Indentures dated as of October 1, 1987 (Designated as Exhibit 4(a) to the Current Report on Form 8-K, dated November 13, 1987, File No. 1-1910) and as of January 26, 1993 (Designated as Exhibit 4(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K, dated January 29, 1993, File No. 1-1910.)


          *4
          (e)
          (g)


           

          Form of Subordinated Indenture between the CompanyBGE and The Bank of New York, as Trustee in connection with the issuance of the Junior Subordinated Debentures. (Designated as Exhibit 4(d) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)


          *4
          (f)
          (h)


           

          Form of Supplemental Indenture between the CompanyBGE and The Bank of New York, as Trustee in connection with the issuancesissuance of the Junior Subordinated Debentures. (Designated as Exhibit 4(e) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)


          *4
          (g)
          (i)


           

          Form of Preferred Securities Guarantee (Designated as Exhibit 4(f) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)


          *4
          (h)
          (j)


           

          Form of Junior Subordinated Debenture (Designated as Exhibit 4(h)4(e) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)


          *4
          (i)
          (k)


           

          Form of Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust (including Form of Preferred Security) (Designated as Exhibit 4(c) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated August 5, 2003, File No. 333-107681.)


          *4
          (j)
          (l)


           

          Indenture dated as of July 24, 2006 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit 4(a) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed July 24, 2006, File No. 333-135991.)
          *4(k)Indenture dated as of July 24, 2006 between Baltimore Gas and Electric CompanyBGE and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit 4(b) to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed July 24, 2006, File No. 333-135991.)


          *4
          (l)
          (m)


           

          First Supplemental Indenture between Baltimore Gas and Electric CompanyBGE and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee, dated as of October 13, 2006. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          *4

          (n)



          Indenture and Security Agreement dated as of July 9, 2009, between BGE and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee (including form of BGE Officer's Certificate and form of Senior Secured Bond) (Designated as Exhibit Nos. 4(u) and 4(u)(1) to Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated July 9, 2009, File Nos. 333-157637 and 333-157637-01.)


          176


          Table of Contents

          Exhibit
          Number


          *4(m)(o) Supplemental Indenture No. 1, dated as of October 1, 2009, to the Indenture and Security Agreement dated as of July 9, 2009, between BGE and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(c) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          *4

          (p)



          BGE Deed of Easement and Right-of-Way Grant dated as of July 9, 2009 (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(u)(2) to Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated July 9, 2009, File Nos. 333-157637 and 333-157637-01.)


          *4

          (q)



          Indenture dated as of June 29, 2007, by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee and Securities Intermediary. (Designated as Exhibit 4.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 5, 2007, File No. 1-1910.)


          *4
          (n)
          (r)


           

          Series Supplement to Indenture dated as of June 29, 2007 by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee and Securities Intermediary (Designated as Exhibit 4.2No. 4(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, File No. 1-1910.)


          *4

          (s)



          Replacement Capital Covenant dated June 27, 2008. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 5, 2007,June 30, 2008, File No. 1-1910.1-12869.)


          *4

          (t)



          Officers' Certificate, dated December 14, 2010, establishing the 5.15% Notes due December 1, 2020 of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., with the form of Notes attached thereto. (Designated as Exhibit No. 4(b) to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 14, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)


          +*10

          (a)


           

          Executive Annual Incentive Plan of Constellation Energy Group, Inc., as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(d) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          +*10

          (b)



          Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          *10

          (c)



          Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(c) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          +*10

          (d)



          Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Benefits Restoration Plan, amended and restated effective June 1, 2010. (Designated as Exhibit 10(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          +*10

          (e)



          Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Supplemental Pension Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(e) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          +*10

          (f)



          Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Senior Executive Supplemental Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(f) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          +*10

          (g)



          Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Executive Supplemental Benefits Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004,June 30, 2008, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          +*10
          (b)
          (h)


           

          Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 1995 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          +*10
          (c)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(c) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(d)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(a) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(e)Amended and restated change in control severance agreement between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Thomas V. Brooks. (Designated as Exhibit 10(f) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005.)
          *10(f)Grantor Trust Agreement Dated as of February 27, 2004 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Citibank, N.A. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(d) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(g)Amended and restated change in control severance agreement between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Mayo A. Shattuck III. (Designated as Exhibit 10.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 19, 2005, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)

          *10(h)Grantor Trust Agreement dated as of February 27, 2004 between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and T. Rowe Price Trust Company. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(i)

           
          Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Benefits Restoration Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(m) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(j)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Supplemental Pension Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(d) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(k)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Senior Executive Supplemental Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(e) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(l)Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Supplemental Benefits Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10(p) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(m)
          Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Executive Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          +*10
          (n)
          (j)


           
          Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 2002 Executive Annual Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(o) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(o)
          Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 2002 Senior Management Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(c) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          177


          Table of Contents

          Exhibit
          Number


          +*10(p)(k) Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Management Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated. (Designated as Exhibit 10(d) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          +*10
          (q)
          (l)


           
          Summary of
          Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Board of Directors Non-Employee Director Compensation Program. (Designated as Exhibit 10(x) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, File Nos. 1-12869Amended and 1-1910.)
          *10(r)Constellation Energy Group, Inc.Restated 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan. (Designated as Exhibit 10(t) to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(s)Investor Agreement, dated July 20, 2007, by and between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Electricite de France International, SA (Designated as ExhibitNo. 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 25, 2007,June 4, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)


          +*10
          (t)
          (m)


           
          Agreed Upon Departure Term Sheet, dated May 18, 2007, by and between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and E. Follin Smith
          Consent of Mayo A. Shattuck III to termination of change-in-control agreement. (Designated as Exhibit 10(b) to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)
          *10(u)Letter Agreement, dated October31, 2007, by and between Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., as agent for JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Associates, London Branch (Designated as ExhibitNo. 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 1, 2007,December 10, 2009, File No. 1-12869.)


          +*10
          (v)
          (n)


           
          Rate Stabilization Property Purchase and Sale Agreement dated as
          Consent of June 29, 2007 by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, as sellerMichael J. Wallace to termination of change-in-control agreement. (Designated as Exhibit 10.1No. 10.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 5, 2007,December 10, 2009, File No. 1-1910.1-12869.)


          +*10
          (w)
          (o)


           

          Consent of Henry B. Barron, Jr. to termination of change-in-control agreement. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2009, File No. 1-12869.)


          *10

          (p)



          Rate Stabilization Property ServiceServicing Agreement dated as of June 29, 2007 by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, as servicer (Designated as Exhibit 10.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 5, 2007, File No. 1-1910.)


          *10
          (x)
          (q)


           

          Administration Agreement dated as of June 29, 2007 by and between RSB BondCo LLC and Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, as administrator (Designated as Exhibit 10.3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 5, 2007, File No. 1-1910.)


          *10
          (y)
          (r)


           

          Second Amended and restated change in control severance agreement betweenRestated Operating Agreement, dated as of November 6, 2009, by and among Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Development Inc., and for certain limited purposes, E.D.F. International S.A. and Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and John R. Collins (Designated as Exhibit 10(bb)No. 10.1 to the AnnualCurrent Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005,8-K dated November 12, 2009, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.No. 1-12869.)
          12

          10

          (s)



          Amendment No. 1 to the Second Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, by and among Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), and E.D.F. International S.A.


          10

          (t)



          Amendment No. 2 to the Second Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, by and among Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), and E.D.F. International S.A.


          *10

          (u)



          Amendment No. 3 to the Second Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, by and among Constellation Nuclear, LLC, CE Nuclear, LLC, EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), and E.D.F. International S.A. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 3, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)


          *10

          (v)



          Credit Agreement, dated as of October 15, 2010, among Constellation Energy Group, Inc., Bank of America, N.A., as a letter of credit issuing bank, swingline lender and administrative agent, Banc of America Securities LLC, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., RBS Securities Inc., BNP Paribas Securities Corp., and The Bank of Nova Scotia, as joint lead arranger and book runners, Citibank, N.A. and The Royal Bank of Scotland plc, as co-syndication agents and The Bank of Nova Scotia and BNP Paribas, as co-documentation agents and the other lenders named therein. (Designated as Exhibit 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 21, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)


          *10

          (w)



          Termination Agreement dated as of November 3, 2010, by and among EDF Inc. (formerly known as EDF Development, Inc.), E.D.F. International S.A., and Constellation Energy Group, Inc. (Designated as Exhibit No. 10.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 3, 2010, File No. 1-12869.)


          +10

          (x)



          Form of Grant Agreement for Stock Units with Sales Restriction.


          12

          (a)


           

          Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.

          12

          12

          (b)


           

          Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Subsidiaries Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and Preferred and Preference Dividend Requirements.
          21

          21




          Subsidiaries of the Registrant.


          178


          Table of Contents

          Exhibit
          Number


          23(a) Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.
          31

          23

          (b)



          Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm (for Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC).


          31

          (a)


           

          Certification of Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
          31

          31

          (b)


           

          Certification of ExecutiveSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
          31

          31

          (c)


           

          Certification of President and Chief Executive Officer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
          31

          31

          (d)


           

          Certification of Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
          32

          32

          (a)


           

          Certification of Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
          32

          32

          (b)


           

          Certification of ExecutiveSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Constellation Energy Group, Inc. pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
          32

          32

          (c)


           

          Certification of President and Chief Executive Officer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
          32

          32

          (d)


           

          Certification of Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.


          99

          (a)



          Audited Financial Statements of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC.


          *99

          (b)



          Operating Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2010, by and among RF HoldCo LLC, Constellation Energy Group, Inc. and GSS Holdings (BGE Utility), Inc. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99-1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          *99

          (c)



          Contribution Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2010, by and among Constellation Energy Group, Inc., BGE and RF HoldCo LLC. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99-2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          *99

          (d)



          Purchase Agreement, dated as of February 4, 2010, by and between RF HoldCo LLC and GSS Holdings (BGE Utility), Inc. (Designated as Exhibit No. 99-3 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 4, 2010, File Nos. 1-12869 and 1-1910.)


          101.INS




          XBRL Instance Document


          101.SCH




          XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document


          101.PRE




          XBRL Taxonomy Presentation Linkbase Document


          101.LAB




          XBRL Taxonomy Label Linkbase Document


          101.CAL




          XBRL Taxonomy Calculation Linkbase Document


          101.DEF




          XBRL Taxonomy Definition Linkbase Document
          +
          Management contracts or compensatory plan or arrangement.

          *
          Incorporated by Reference.

                  In accordance with Rule 402 of Regulation S-T, the XBRL related information in Exhibit 101 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K shall not be deemed to be "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section, and shall not be incorporated by reference into any registration statement or other document filed under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except as shall be expressly set forth by specific reference in such filing.


          179